Chapter 4 There Is No Other of the Other
1. J. Lacan, The Seminar. Book VII. The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, 1959–1960(London: Routledge,
199 2), p. 52.
2. Ibid., pp. 103 , 129 (my translation).
3. See, for example, ibid., p. 55.
4. Ibid., p. 54 (my translation).
5. Lacan’s realization that the Thing is, first and foremost, real, and consequently dumb,
does not mean that the unconscious ceases to speak: see, for instance, ibid., pp.205‒206.
Miller was the first to emphasize how the existence of “another Lacan” (the Lacan of the
Real) does not imply the negation of the thesis that “the unconscious is structured like
a language.” See especially J.-A. Miller, “D’un autre Lacan,” Ornicar?,no. 28 (January
1984 ), pp.49‒57.
6. The Seminar. Book VII,p.19 6.
7. See, for example, Seminar VI, lesson of November 12 , 1958.
8. See especially J. Lacan, Le séminaire livre IV. La relation d’objet, 1956–1957(Paris: Seuil, 199 4),
Chapter VII ; J. Lacan, Le séminaire livre V. Les formations de l’inconscient, 1957–1958(Paris : Seuil,
1998 ), Chapter XIII.
9. There are therefore four different phases in the evolution of the notion of fantasy: 1. The
fantasy belongs only to perverse masochists (Seminars IV and V); 2. The paternal meta-
phor presupposes a standard, universal phallic fantasy, but Lacan does not assume it
(Seminar V); 3. The fantasy is assumed as universal, but its masochism is still confined
to perverts (Seminar VI). This is why Seminar VI discusses the fantasy almost exclusively
as an imaginaryformation, and consequently with almost no reference to the Real of jouis-
sance; 4. The fantasy is universal and universally masochistic even in its standard, phallic
version. The real (masochistic) role of the fantasy is presupposed by Seminar VII, but is
only later developed in Seminar X (when the object abegins to be thematized also as a
real object).
10. When jouissanceis pompously introduced in Seminar V, it is exclusively referred to per-
verse masochism (see especially Le séminaire livre V,Chapter XIV). Yet in Seminar V, Lacan
contradictorily admits that (nonpathological) perversion is a precondition of man as
being of language... (ibid., pp. 78 , 311 ).
11. Ibid., p. 463. Lacan also speaks of “the Other of this Other, that which allows the subject
to perceive this Other, the locus of speech, as being itself symbolized.” Miller has him-
self appropriately entitled one of the sections of this lesson (June 18 , 1958 ) “L’Autre de
l’Autre.”
12. Seminar VI, lesson of May 13 , 1959.
13. J. Lacan, The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955–56(London: Routledge, 1993 ), p. 226.
14. J. Lacan, Écrits: A Selection(London: Tavistock, 1977 ), p. 201 (emphasis added).
15. Lacan indeed speaks of “partial delusions” even with reference to Schreber’s case: ibid.,
p. 214.
16. Ibid., p. 217.notes to pages 105–111