Archive - Apocalyptic Act

On the Faith of Psychoanalysts: a Cause of Desire, which is a Cause.

Leave a reply

The signifier is acrostic to the Letter’s Ousia- not homoousian: it is the Summa Theologica of the Epistula Purloined: and it can be that, because the Act is autonomous, as much as the master signifiers designating the trauma and its destiny, wreathing, and not breathing, with all the musicality of its arias ∙ that faith is indeed the praxis of the subject, an Alien Act to the binary of idolatry of the One and or the Other, not of the Agalma– certainly not that of Pygmalion, whose The Woman has been exteriorized through, and by, a marble stature, a procedure in opposition to that of Orpheus’ and Lot’s faith, with the subsequent man having his name signifying the veil in Hebrew, a veil he did not use because he subtracted his own faith ∙ idolographical, that is a much better of a word for an epistolary poet who has not yet written, not yet, for, the principle is that of desire, a motion in itself and not bound in the ethics of philosophy as it is that which binds an ethic. And, if the Πίστις of the Greeks, with a small object cause of desire in its front, just a small letter α, so to turn the word α-πίστις, and terracing faith to the object cause, which is a cause, the analytic cause, in other words, that is an ethic in its own fundamental nature, then the trust and faith of the analyst is to have a good laugh with the still scientific melancholia of Russell, who, as a true fanatical obsessive seeking to erase any demand alluding to a desire, he commands the subject to bring to an end the process of a delicate science, by saying that, When there is evidence, no one speaks of faith: but dear Bertrand, it is those evidence that aggravate a spirit to request faith.

 

 

The Psychoanalytic Act: On the Formation of the No-Body.

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

The Organon of Desire: neither a Phallus nor a Penis.

Leave a reply

The eunuch does not put perpendicular a penis and, without fail, not a phallus- this is to opine, if meaning and the symbolization of an apologue could be the intergradient of a sustenance, which is not at the end, when it comes about to interpret a dream, that the devout follower of a queen, who, when exposed to femininity, does not obtain any anxiety, or so ever, regarding the symbolic castration∙ he, that he without the phallus, does retrospect the donation of the tongues, so much as to speak to a woman’s body· the instrumentality  of the transference is not that of the subject suppose to know- that is not enough for faith- one does need the miracle of speaking many tongues, in fact many letters, not confusion equal to Babelism to whom the gentiles would refer as bar-bar-ism, and had the authority to recite the letter of the signifier’s bar, but, the Apeiron of that great discourse that a woman’s drive is not able to grasp, because of the continuum expressed though the Other and becomes the acrolectal optic disabling the analyst to learn a new correspondence- this is not, honestly, enough to explain the drive’s anaplasia. The distinction between psychoanalyst and psychoanalysand is abolished by the Act- Dixitque Deus: Fiat lux. Et facta est lux– that is a Act, when one’s word is an act by itself· a parallel to the shield of Achilles’ depiction, if we request to speak about that feminine drive, that which can only be a death spirit equal to the Keres, for, it is an excess of itself resisting the psychostasia of the structure determined by the signifiers and the optical field of the gaze.

 

 

The Psychoanalytic Act: On the Formation of the No-Body.

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

The Real is not the impossible- the Real is the Ethic.

Leave a reply

What is impossible to bear is the Ethic of desire, too much of an oral object for a technician’s stomach∙ the misrepresentation of formalization, one limited to a small area by the gonioscopy of mastery, has been proved possible, as the ethic of desire is impossible because analysts  squander their tongue’s propositions in uttering a premise for its sake and not its essence, talking about after all a curing science: there are diminutive amounts of orientating new analysts but too much cure, and analysts have become the extraordinary coincidence of a circus’ arena within associations or schools∙ that failure, certainly, does not cease to not write itself, and baring that Real does not desiderate a body but an ethical motion, not a position, for one’s desire. Simply that∙ for whom, then, is the real impossible to bear, if not for the analysts or a given school, for as long as analysts converse of the sessions within the structure of a formalization, not being able to learn anew an alphabet speaking for themselves, then, surely the letter does not have its baring and possesses the gloomy ambiance of a ceiling, forbidden to escape, lynching above desire like the sword of Damocles∙ and, since there are, even to this year, questions of the symptom’s measurement and separation, as been clinical or not, we could pull our eyelids and sponge down our hands before saying that it is the analyst who is clinical or not, when he is uncoordinated from the culture and sheltered into the fantasy of psychiatry’s throne: bearing a desire does not require one’s body- it is braying that depends upon a body: and that is the zetetic.

 

And, about the presentation of cases by those deacons of misery specialized in the thanatosis of the wish, let us simply say that analysts ought to necessitate in discovering how to enlighten stories not from paper, not too dreary for the ears and optimistically to tease enough one’s enthusiasm- stories that are not theirs, but it is such a difficult task when one trades the ethics of the cause: and if there is a further utterance, a feeble one tyrannizing this generation’s minds and makes psychoanalysis an amount of sordid hors d’oeuvre, this is the structure of the impossible to bear and the impossible of the practice of psychoanalysis: psychoanalysis, my dear friend, is not practiced but lived- for when at that point where a subject diagnoses its desire is not only for utilizing it only within the sessions as if it is some breed of an abracadabra∙ and if we are in love with using the word clinic, with or without the ostentatious vocabulary commendable of a baroque epoch, and exonerations that we do not fundamentally trust, then, the clinic is that of the letter and desire, and, for that we ought to know at least a word to say about: about the Ethic repressed. An experimentation praiseworthy of a commendable amusement would be to illegitimate analysts’ reading from papers with reference to their experiences in the sessions, but, instead, let them perorate and free associate- and the thaumaturgic statement of the impossible to say will glare itself in front of the spectators’ Achilles heel, to allow that free association: it is impossible to say because analysts cannot Act, stuttering their desire, for, that which cannot be said is an Act∙ one ought to think, however, what is not allowing them to speak- and that, according to Freud, is for the love of the parent.

 

Silence in this case is not the speech of the Act, the doing of desire- speech here is the trauma: what is unfeasible to bear and said is desire, which is not lazy∙ and, if there is an impossibility in psychoanalysis, this is nothing else than the forgotten desire by a school, an orientation and analysts themselves∙ let us produce convinced low-tuned whispering reverberations, like old men, about case presentations and catechize by testing the waters, what can we take notice of from the apostles and the infamous Acta Apostolorum, stated under oath in a confident manner, which is a good pass and a testimony: when one’s being is dedicated to desire. And, a thunderous signifying chain, whose signifieds emphasize meaning through questions, about the subject whom the orientation could describe as been under the anathema of the impossible to say, impracticable to speak, that is the assemblage of analysts in a congress, who, not been daring enough to heave their voices they prefer reading from a piece of paper- what a somniferous attitude towards the Cause, too many bores opiate desire- those, those who are not able to speak, those who are bounded with an eternal commemorative moment of silence, and who are not the same from the impossible to say of the analysand: and many, misologysts of desire, under the vow of a true silence, because of the fear of losing the love of the Other, ought to think that at least monks’ silence is accompanied by a practice and an Act, much different, yet again, form this class of an Omertà.

 

Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch– this is what symphonizes psychoanalysis as been a pseudoscience: when the analysts’ speech is not oriented by desire∙ it would be an invocation accompanied by a flight of the imagination, if those misologysts have been at least a bit Laconian and less Lacanian, to talk little but precisely. There is also something else to echo one’s thoughts on, to become skilled at the exchange of phonemes, and make our pitiful common sense to amend the questions orienting the practise- that, Spartan students were biting their thumps to castigate themselves because they rambled too much their responses∙ the trauma of lalangue is present in analysts’ inability to speak without preparation in front of an audience- they are not responsible for their words and that is the Sinthome of a bad approach to speech itself: it is unquestionably clinical my dear friend. Get them to speak, to free associate without quotes or texts and see if they can bear the responsibility of their word- then, truly, then the impossibility of the Real, the ethics of desire, will be vivid, too vivid to engross in the symbolic.

 

 

The Psychoanalytic Act: On the Formation of the No-Body.

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

On the Desire that is Agape and not Science.

Leave a reply

The Act of God is Alien- it is demoniac, as the signifier engrosses the amateur dramatics of acting in the discourse, not a word but a true to the end operational vocation, which is not a doing: it is not the democracy of the letters, unquestionably not that∙ the analyst,  is not some genus of a ghostlike being: with a bit of fortune analysts could have stimulated their thoughts towards the filthy granules of the been aware of the nature of the subject supposed to know, which is not, not this time, the scarecrow of transference- since it unbraids the podium’s stance upon where the speaking being will interweave the outward appearance of its act∙ this is what could have make this creature called psychoanalyst an extraordinary mortal, because it Acts on its word and not biology: not a usual quality of analysts, and, there could be a peculiar something to spice those minds, with a prescribed amount of high-quality affluence and excellent omens, are not to be characterised, as Adler wrote, idiots from birth∙ and whilst the crux of the moment is at its timeless soil and the subject’s inadvertencies cough up the letter, because it perseveres, not without stubbornness, the signifier’s latitude, the Act condescends to the signifier its real value and makes audible the speaking being manifested within the course of an analysis, something of a fresh principal capital for the new mounting economy, becoming the Archangel’s ambrosial scale of what is a worth according to the given desire of the Acting Being: for, a word to have a price, a simmering somewhat of one’s own manure becoming a fertilizer, in or out a compost for he that is able to Act, the subject no longer per-verses its word by not acting∙ the code of Bushido, a good game of words for those philologists to transmit to the pre-mentioned manure, the heroic code, exists along a perverse discourse, only that the hero dedicates his being into, not to but into, an act serving a cause: that is not the act of science, but of Agape.

 

 

The Psychoanalytic Act: On the Formation of the No-Body.

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

The Threshold that is not a Gate.

1 Reply

The Act bankruptcies the equivalence of the subject and its signifiers- it is Alien to the discourse that is a semblance∙ what class of an antechamber in the adytum is the analysand’s verdict to accept, not to enter, analysis, and to refuse the replication for the sake of a metasis of its jouissance∙ and who, again, and who, and what genus of a place is the psychoanalytic session, notwithstanding its material coordinates, if not a place where there is no door or a gate- even more to ask is how the session is embodied, as what, in a given analytic culture drowned by the discourses of capitalism and modern science, where, for the very first time, analysts are provoked by the desire that had arrived in Freud’s medulla oblongata, forcing him to glimpse curiously a few kilometres further than the localization of what is a body, and to be exemplifiers of that human arche, which is freedom, through the Act, a threshold of itself, by which psychoanalysis is indebted to civilisation, that very one conditioning the walls and gates of their atrophic practises, as much as of their inability to account for their responsibility and the ethos of an Act as, from that chair that imitates Freud and Lacan, they enjoy undertoning about wild analyses and never of responsible acts: it is true what their never thirsty lips shape- but as such speaks only a coward.

 

The structure indoctrinates the analyst∙ as much as the gospel of Mathew sought to esteem Jesus’s teaching by encompassing signifiers to the prophesies of the Old Testament, so much of the same these analysts have been converted into the temple’s scribes- knowing everything and acting too little, certainly not the few and well desired wished by Lacan in his founding Act∙ indoctrination∙ and, yet, it confines the Act as a discipline locating the body to a solid position- let aside that the Act is an end in itself∙ the profession, let us say, suffers from Atherosclerosis, by greatly provited violent doses of consumption of triglyceride and cholesterol: analysts have become obese and stringy- isolated like illnesses on quarantine, with an anaemic desire never in place and use∙ the analyst does not have any control over the Act, for, its threshold is not a space: the doing and the action are under the spells of a position, not the Act, which is an opposition of rebellion from the hands of psychoanalysis’ capitalism, against those commandments of more speed and the how, upon which a supposed scientific psychoanalytic reasoning has evolved- what the analyst is control of, when it comes to the act, is the ethos allowing in overcoming a law that is unlawful when confronted with the human, very human, desire- to that, we ought to admit that analysts are better quote-vaporisers than practitioners, for, practitioners of the nature of desire are characterised by their praxis: the voice of the analyst is the Act and not its anaesthesia, a quality equal to lazy sun-stroked donkeys.

 

What is a threshold- one that has ministered analysts as been the law of the practise, with them not been able to come across it, transversely, not because it was forbidden or marked by some sort of an extraordinary flowing heat like Pyriphlegethon, but, for the reason that the junction itself means originality and responsibility, more, even to know what one is talking about- what is it, if not the realm that is not an abode, and where the body is liquefied, and where the death drive, the myth of lamella becoming real, veiling the analysts’ somatic organs of jouissance, yet with the sense of bodily jouissance still at place but with no use, with its imprint around the organ than has been the confederate of lamella now assisting this Act∙ this is exactly the nature of a saint’s temptation, however a no-evil if not part of a religious discourse, befalling when the analyst crosses the footpath encountering a very powerful object as sweet as the acoustics of the Sirens’ song, a manacle of signifiers having no signified and dignity, though devouring motion and rhythm are moving the body: here is the threshold that is not a gate, where stands psychoanalysis’ own death drive- that what we may call excessive speech or excessive listening and it is excessive without the Act, an Act answering to the million said utterance: from where do I start Mr psychoanalyst: from the Act, my dear subject, you have already started- the question ought to be asked by your analyst: from the Act, which is not Alien to the speaking being but to the analyst∙ the Act is the deed of a creation that itself acts upon the Apeiron∙ it cannot be acatalectic.

On the Register of the Act.

Leave a reply

The very element of the analytic Act is silence- that, a Being Silent and Eupnoea, which analysts disremember to honour their anamnesis, and whose anamorphosis alongside the act reserves the speaking being, the he-dummy who attempts to say that which cannot be said for the sake of the phallus∙ it is an ErgOn, the diacritical object of psychoanalysis and the inhabitation of the visceral beast, that animal who has the proneness, because of the phoneme, to become foolish towards biology, and from where the speaking being Acts, been no more a speaking being but an Ergon whose word is a praxis, because he has said so∙ the threshold, that which is not to be overpassed but crossed, maybe in the erudite style of the Argonauts who allowed the phallus to crush its tail, is that sanctioning or eliminating speech itself- the particular topography of the resisters remaining unexplored because, accurately, analysts do not act in the custom proper to an Acting Being∙ it is a step further than science and no close to a creed, a monarchy at the pathos of the act where the solution to the substance of how does the Subject supposed to Know deal with the humanity of the session∙ to that threshold one is to encounter the Ethic, not before crossing it.

 

 

The Psychoanalytic Act: On the Formation of the No-Body.

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

On the Act Treating the Psychoanalyst.

Leave a reply

The analyst does not own a proboscis. Free Association is an anathema for the act of treating the psychoanalyst- if analysis itself is the treatment domiciling at the analyst; free association as the despicable for the conduction of an analysis has been the folly of follies of our practise, if, as Lacan said, psychoanalysis is the treatment the analyst reintroduces from an analysand- more than that, it is the treatment analysis aftereffects from being created each time o’er. It substances the analyst into the papal chair of the he who receives the discourse or, equally, he who is a subject supposed to know what goes on with this discursive subject that suffers, when, in fact, it is the catholicon, a blameless portion of an antidote for the subject supposed to know. What is the Act when this entrance occurs in the form of a demand for analysis, if not the demand of a poet, as much as Ovid, to hear the synthetic amalgam of an innovative rhyme, of a Ποίησης that is a creation, which will rediscover and reinvent psychoanalysis once again, a Ποίησης reinventing, truly, two poets, equally, and which it cannot be unless the poets Act- there should be a question mark here.

 

 

 

The Psychoanalytic Act: On the Formation of the No-Body.

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

On the Perversity of the Psychoanalytic Act: The Avowal of the Word.

Leave a reply

The Act can only be Perpendicular- a laceration on the derangement of the signifier’s circumgyration, for, the analyst is neither a doctor nor a hermit and the orientation itself is terribly not an example of an eremitic tradition- not that the analyst cannot be in the position of the Shaman: what does a shaman do, a question worthy to bedevil one’s lips. The Shaman is Beethoven. The Summum bonum of psychoanalysis is the silence of the Act- that constitutes an end in itself, not a union. It can be, and only, not to become, for it is not horizontal as justice is, but, perpendicular for its Spermatikos Logos, Clemen’s act onto the discourse of the Christian apologetics’ destiny, encompassing an Act, is Agape, be that for the given subject of freedom; and let another subject be a walking analysand, if this pseudonymous and gossamery being were a fanatic of Aristotle; and, when the watered lips of the analyst vomit the phonemes of the intervention, or, when his prism called body, that mass surrendered like a traitor to a timed desire- God forbid this been a desire- is without a doubt what one may use as an example of the horizontal axioms of the signifier, which is the way of an analyst who is the Pharisee of Pharisees, believing in the letter of the law and on the unity of spacetime: what a great example of psychotherapy, not analysis- certainly not Kantian.

 

 

The Psychoanalytic Act: On the Formation of the No-Body.

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

Not a Semblance: On the Formation of the No-Body.

Leave a reply

That which cannot be spoken, is an Act. The Olivet Discourse, that lilliputian apocalyptic praxis approbating the Act alfresco from the linear candles of time, those of the before and of the after, makes itself current because Mathew’s gospel, to whom Lacan has dedicated a repetition of his name in his seminar on the Act- that is disremembered when it comes to that Real which cannot be said, with whom analysts fail to recollect that it is acted, for, they cannot act upon the knot and turn it into, at least, a Hansel and Grete metaphor of finding a way out- and with which one ought to commiserate that the instrumentality of an evil spell instead of the gospel∙ that one attributed to Mathew has been directed towards the Hebrews as much as Lacan directed his seminars to the formation of psychoanalysts, been in the position of the aerial transition of a literature one cannot read, not Next to, but Towards, which another evangelist wrote: And the Word, that is not a lexis alone, was towards God but not the Kinesis of the letter which is beyond∙ the Olivet Discourse occurs at the moment of pathos- an orientation that can depart en route for a two-flowing superintendence as exemplified by the Diskobolus, if an analyst is in possession of an autocratic aegis as much as Caesar contravening the rudimentary canon because he acted on what constitutes that imperative itself∙ anxiety is produced at that twinkling of the fathom of a breath’s illiterate noisomeness, and to which an analyst cannot say for sure that it is the result of truism of the conveyance of a mono alphabetic substitution- a letter representing the letter for another letter: that is the Apraxia of time, where the subjects’ chirokinesthesian Acts generate a Being outside of time’s parable, even outside from the cave that one sees only the shadows of the Platonic word, acts, that are moving a worth allied with a Being Silent.

 

 

 

The Psychoanalytic Act: On the Formation of the No-Body.

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

 

The Apocalyptic Act- Part 6: On the Silence of the Act.

Leave a reply

Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent- and it does not make much difference if psychoanalysis as a discourse itself, playing with Wittgenstein’s statement within the gaps comminated by analysts’ mouths, describes from its campanile a subject, to enumerate a utterance for that which cannot be spoken; and, because the corresponding duplicate of a dupe is a dupe, let us originate for the better and for the amenability of the position of he who is an active listener and not free associated, that, whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must act in silence: for, what cannot be said is attended by the silence of the Act, akin to the Gordian knot and the encountering of Alexander with what would not be, not could not be, untied: that which is not solved, it is an act- because the Being Silent is a being acting, the he who holds ‘a’ destiny in his own hands and fathoms within a realm of accountability annexing the gnosis of what to do with ID, a-far from the silhouette of the God formulated in the sentence He can do all, and close to the skeletal frame of the He does all.

 

 

The Psychoanalytic Act: On the Formation of the No-Body.

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.