Today, the psychoanalytic field witnesses the emergence of the questions that it persistently preferred to avoid. How is the community of psychoanalysts structured? What can the community bring to its members, and how is this membership actually formulated? Can the very psychoanalytic thinking get by without considering its institutional aspect? These and other related questions were raised in the discussion between the two famous theorists and psychoanalysts - Gabriel Tupinambá and Alexander Smulansky, where they had an opportunity to develop their ideas and outline the trajectory for the yet to come research. The debate, organized by the LacanLink project, follows the Russian translation of Tupinambá's book The Desire of Psychoanalysis that was provided with an extensive afterword written by Smulansky. The English translation is available here lacan.link/texts
LacanLink is a research platform aimed at promoting a new approach in dealing with psychoanalysis and other thought systems
Our facebook: / lacanlink
Our website: lacan.link/
______________________________________________
Introduction (0:00)
• our guests’ presentation (00:56)
• the discussion outline (03:10)
I. THE QUESTION OF CRISIS AND THE CRISIS OF THE QUESTION (04:56)
Alexander Smulansky “Freud’s Desire and the Real Discourse of the Analyst” (06:16)
• institutional corruption and the vicissitudes of theory (06:35)
• the reinvention of the materialist explanation (08:35)
• the consequences of the Freudian enterprise (10:27)
• two types of crisis (12:16)
• the real discourse of the analyst (12:41)
• Freud’s turndown of community (14:16)
• the underside of crisis (16:55)
Gabriel Tupinambá “Three Levels of Institution” (17:47)
• the political level: the redistribution of discussions (18:39)
• the historical level (22:50)
• the conservative turn in psychoanalysis (23:32)
• the cyclicality of crises and crisis of cyclicality (28:15)
• the intervention and its place (31:39)
• the place of speech in psychoanalysis: inside or out (36:38)
• institution and constitution (39:58)
II. THE ROLE OF ANALYSANDS AND THE POLICY OF ACCESS (43:12)
Alexander Smulansky “The Analyst’s Anxiety and the Access to Analysis” (45:05)
• the conservative solution of access (45:07)
• the access to community via the analyst’s anxiety (47:03)
• the transference on institution as the unanalyzable element of didactic analysis (50:41)
Gabriel Tupinambá “The Logic and the Limits of Transference” (45:05)
• the dialectic of analyst and analysand commonality (54:01)
• the blind spot in the communities’ structure (57:03)
• the institutional effects in the analytic process (01:03:21)
Alexander Smulansky “Redefining the Analyzing Subject” (01:10:04)
• analysis works as long as the analyst does not interfere (01:10:06)
• reinventing the analyzing subject (01:12:11)
• politics as the question of access (01:13:23)
Gabriel Tupinambá “Public Discussion as the Means of Dealing with Anxiety” (01:14:29)
The End (01:18:08)
22 май 2024
