REMUNERACIONES ECONÓMICAS 47

Figure 4: The second graph

Note. From Lacan, J. (2006). Écrits (B. Fink, Trans.). New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, p.684.

The second graph (Figure 4) is derived from the elementary cell of the point de caption,but with some important additions. Firstly, the points of intersection through the

diachronic axis of the signifying chain (S → S′) are labelled Aand s(A), respectively. The transit of the vector representing the nascent subject intersects with the signifying chain, firstly, on the right at intersection A(Autre, ‘the Other’); ‘the treasure trove of

signifiers’ in the locus of the o(O)ther (E, p.682). This is the initial ‘place’ of insertion into the Symbolic order. The potentially emergent subject is compelled into assimilation (alienation); compelled to conform to the terms prescribed in the matrix of signification (the Other as Symbolic order), and to identify with the signification as presented by the other. In general social terms, this can be considered the entire repertoire of forms and practices of the specific cultural milieu into which the ‘individual’ human organism (the body of the neonate) is born, bearing in mind that ‘culture’ – as an umbrella term for the organisation of groups around social, economic and political formations – is diverse and by no means universal. What could be considered universal, however, is the dynamic process of alienation through which this interpellation through the particular other occurs and the resultant relational structure that, through repetition, ossifies. What appears to be a diachronic developmental process over chronological time – through the auspices of language, consciousness and memory – involves the synchronic disjuncture

that Lacan called ‘logical time’, the pivotal feature of the unconscious. For the present, however, the discussion turns back to the appearance of the treasure trove of signifiers (A) as it first appears on the graph of desire and, more specifically, the level of the

relational process with ‘the particular other’, through which the Other becomes incarnate.

In a state of complete helplessness and dependency, due to the extreme

prematurity of the human infant at birth, the neonate receives the message from the other at the level of the body through the opaque sensations of touch and movement, smell,

taste, sound, and sight. These are the primal ‘mirror stage’ signifying elements or

specular images –i(a)– of the Imaginary register that not only ground and pave the way for language in its linguistic form, but also are reciprocally implicated in the calibration of the body of the neonate through the asymmetric reflections and refractions with the o(O)ther. The Symbolic and Imaginary registers are irrevocably destined to be entwined. It is an asymmetric relation, however, because there is no choice: if the neonate is to survive, the only path is through alienation and a compulsory identification into the signifying chain of the o(O)ther. This not only radically alters perceptions of cause and effect, but also reconfigures apparent notions of what is ‘natural’ or instinctual with reference to the body. Because the ‘treasure trove of signifiers’ pre-exists the entry point

of the subject, the subject is unaware of the framing of the ‘reality’ into which it is

drawn. It is necessarily grounded on hidden assumptions outside any possible knowledge to be attained in the Symbolic order.

The second point of intersection –s(A) –denotes the ‘moment’ where meaning

is produced by the Other. It designates ‘the punctuation, in which signification ends as a

finished product’ (E, p.682). Although the vector s(A) → A represents the diachronic

dimension of signification, it is important to grasp that the looping of the vector

representing the entry of the nascent subject institutes a circuit of ‘two way traffic’: the

right to left movement of the pressure of need or biological impulses A→ s(A), and the

signifying chain of the Other’s discourse from left to right, s(A) → A. More specifically,

for Lacan, it is necessary to observe ‘the dissymmetry between the one [A], which is a locus (a place, rather than a space), and the other [s(A)], which is moment (a scansion,

rather than a duration) … one as a hollow for concealment, the other as a drilling toward a way out’ (E, p.682). These contrary oscillating movements constitute the first “logical moments” in the formation of the speaking subject (Penot, 2005, para.1). In addition, there is a delta originating from A that returns via the upper portion of an inner circuit that is added to the inside of the elementary cell on the second graph. This vector, after passing through the Imaginary‘mirror stage’ vector i(a)→m, doubles the circuit through its return along the signifying chain (from left to right). The mirroring process, prefigured above, is elaborated by the lower portion of the inner circuit. These are the synchronic dimensions that are secreted and entwined within the more obvious diachronic ordering of the signifying chain.

The inner circuit circumscribed by the elementary cell can best be understood in two phases: (i) as a short circuit; and (ii) as an additional doubling where subject

formation has a second synchronous circuit that intersects and returns across the

signifying chain s(A) → A (from left to right). As such, it elaborates the formation of the

embryonic ‘mirror stage’ ego –m (moi) – in the Imaginary, and its implication as it intersects with the Symbolic and the resultant relation to the ego Ideal– I(A) – the

anticipated outcome at the terminal point of the trajectory from the original delta (now labelled  on the lower right of the schema). The mirror stage occurs on the trajectory of

registered and calibrated by the particular other, a (autre). These ‘specular image[s]’,

which Penot (2005) designates as occurring in the register of ‘spatial-corporeal

representation’ (para.6), are grafted onto the pressure of need and constitute the Imaginary relation that forms the embryonic ego –m.

At the level of the short circuit (the vector that travels between i(a) → m), the

embryonic ego is an amorphous collection of ‘mirror stage’ reflections and refractions

that remain fragmented. A fixation at this point – before any secure suture within the Symbolic chain of the o(O)ther is established – can result in the schizophrenic effect of bodily fragmentation, a symptom associated with psychotic structure. It is only with the doubling that occurs (with the vector that travels from A → i(a) → m → and its return through the signifying chain) that the point de capiton manages to secure together the embryonic and fragmented sense images with the signifying chain s(A) → A. At this juncture, the subject is alienated into the signifying chain of the o(O)ther and the consequent promise of cohesion and completion in relation to the ego Ideal– I(A) – is established as a goal towards which it strives. It is pertinent to note, for future reference, that Lacanian psychoanalysis – as opposed to other post-Freudian psychoanalytic and psychological theories and clinical therapeutic practice(s) – questions the efficacy of strengthening this inner circuit of ego formation in the Imaginary which confines the subject in a terminal alienation within the o(O)ther. For Lacan, at this stage in his theoretical development (his later work moves towards the register of the Real), the efficacy of treatment lies in the Symbolic where separation from the symbiotic and puppet-like duality of the Imaginary can be enacted. Any reinforcement of the Imaginary ego is simply a matter of further alienation into the illusory anticipation of wholeness of the ego Ideal which represents a closed circuit of conformity.

The vital temporal aspect to be understood from the second circuit inside the elementary cell is the effect of anticipation. The neonate’s emergence into the

embryonic formation of the ego in the Imaginary is founded upon an Ideal that is

necessarily reflected in relation with the o(O)ther. Although the infant/other relationship appears to adhere to a linear biological form of development, the Lacanian reference to

‘moments’ does not refer exclusively to moments in a linear notion of chronological

is pertinent and necessary to digress to a more detailed discussion of Lacan’s utilisation

of retroaction and anticipation, and his concept of ‘logical time’ (a significant feature of the unconscious).