The highly arcane "wisdom" produced by the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan is either endlessly regurgitated and recited as holy writ by his numerous acolytes, or radically dismissed as unpalatable nonsense by his equally countless detractors. Contrary to these common, strictly antagonistic yet uniformly uncritical practices, this book offers a meticulous critique of some key theoretical and clinical aspects of Lacan’s expansive oeuvre, testing their consistency, examining their implications, and investigating their significance.
In nine interrelated chapters, the book highlights both the flaws and the strengths of Lacan’s ideas, in areas of investigation that are as crucial as they are contentious, within as well as outside psychoanalysis. Drawing on a vast range of source materials, including many unpublished archival documents, it teases out controversial issues such as money, organisational failure, and lighthearted, "gay" thinking, and it relies on the highest standards of scholarly excellence to develop its arguments. At the same time, the book does not presuppose any prior knowledge of Lacanian psychoanalysis on the part of the reader, but allows its readership to indulge in the joys of in-depth critical analysis, trans-disciplinary creative thinking, and persistent questioning.
This book will appeal to researchers and students alike in psychoanalytic studies and philosophy, as well as all those interested in French theory and the history of ideas.
There are about 500 words in each chapter of this book which are brilliantly illuminating.
Nobus is clearly a master of Freud and Lacan's work, but I do not understand how this book has made it passed its editors. The prose is unbearably excessive, the grammar is like I've never seen before and it would be impossible to agree that every part of every chapter contributes to that chapter's discussion.
A book that is filled with brilliant readings of Lacan and Freud, and which I recommend--particularly the third chapter, on the obscure object of psychoanalysis, and the discussion of the ego, specifically, as "subject"--but one that is unfortunately written.