Archive - Petros Patounas is a Psychoanalyst practicing in London

On the Foreclosure of the Act: the New Unconscious.

Leave a reply

The Κήρυγμα of a not war, of an Act without the Other that is foreign to desire, that which it is neither received nor understood by the arrogant princes of intellect; and it is perceived as wild because it would have been difficult to construct a given geography without tools that are given before hand by those who have reached and received knowledge from the domain of shadows- thus the way of necromantic paranoia is preferable than that of the quixotic mystic who has to read and be written according to the Figures of Speech.

The sons of the whore of Babylon will never speak English, for, they are happily arrogant within the beautiful truth of their fantasy- that there is no God; and because of this they will never seek, never find, or never read and certainly not write that which is supposed to be transmitted from one body to the other when psychoanalysts are formed: interpretation ought to fruitage magnificently the signifier of a new Act when it comes to analysis, no less than when it comes to life because they are one; and yet those arrogant martyrs of boredom, whose books and language- and rotten faith- have no idea that the first interpretation is the point of orientation in the form of a topology where the subject will place his body and faith, one that ought to contextualize and to create a love affair- call it a fuck if you wish- on What is psychoanalysis for that specific subject. But to do so, one must at first get rid of the “sacred cloak” of psychoanalyst.

And under the veil of a dead man’s wish in Hades, once a king and a great warrior, to be alive and exist as the slave of the slave on earth, a pale movement apparatus comes forth with a grimace ironizing the leader of the sons of whores, murmuring and whispering to their ears What an amazing Other of the Other is created here with this so called metonymy because there is no body!

The Act is the metalanguage. Such whispered further the mumbling king: the phallus is not a cut after all, but a small topology within the topology of the knot that allows movement and certain space from the Voice: the speaking body cannot be today’s unconscious- today’s unconscious is a God that does not Act. It is Apraxia my dear friend that has been elevated along with vomitus speaking as the new bodies, bodies that speak but do nothing; the whore has been giving birth to sons that foreclose “work” and the “Act,” who are flatterers of the intellect and praise psychoanalysts who, since they gave an oath to Atheism that became the new image of their Mammon, their only direction is paranoia: for, it is paranoia or desire. Boring- too boring- the diagnosis of a structure in order to find the place of the analyst: this is what disables the possibilities of the Act, but very few women would dare to say to their magnanimous spouses that his acrobatics and techniques are worthy of a circus and not for love making: they will not dare, those women analysts, because themselves seek to become men: what forbids the No-Body is this phallus my friend.

On the Sublimation of the Feminine Object

Leave a reply

Within the structure there cannot be sublimation or an Act; Sublimierung is the kinesis when the object is ostracized to corral the place of the Thing, not of the letters of the patronymic name of the father and the antipodal of the second life but of the signature of the autograph of one’s’ Acts- we will not perorate of Lazarus’ legend once again: lo and behold of the thieves of the cross and perceptibly of those who have elopemented it, and, who, who could have been with the effortlessness by which a few representatives of flattery of Irish ancestry, prophets of Docetism, of those who stated with the moronic certainty of the devil that there are only two types of Acts; this retorting scientists of a Freudian praxis away and far away from life but nearer to those truths that are of intellectualism and of phrenic cowardice: there have been patients, but not analysts because the sublimation is of those objects that are masculine, quantitative in terms of the drive and the metages that are of the phallus- the real phallus is the cause because psychoanalysis is a practise of life, declared on the soil that stinks of a living Breath: lo and behold of the analysts who have never surpassed their own anxieties- lo and behold of the analysts who cure but create not the possibilities for novel formations unless those fall under the dimensional geography of the master- they have forgotten that they never ought to be lacking in zeal because they are doomed to be desiring subjects, and keep their spiritual fervour, serving the cause- until they die, not because they seek to live: life cannot be but the Verbification of the Subject of the Unconscious: this is the obol of the analysts.

 

There cannot be a real sublimation unless the object is feminine: it is at this summit of gentle holiness and loneliness that the object becomes a cause writting signifiers from letters owning nothing to jouissance but dedication to desire, for, in its empire of sublimation- drive, satisfaction that “Does not ask anything from Anyone” takes one and hopefully many away from the spells of the Other, to that infamous Being Silent who knows the ways of the Letters’ kinesis, and who cannot only read the breath like the Yogis but can actually write on its plasmatic courses and love manners: for, it is not enough to have the imaginary, or even symbolic metamorphoses of the drive- it has never been enough unless psychoanalysts have given the same oath, that is to manipulate the signifier who manipulates and the subject shifts its place in the same fundamental fantasy- this is enough for a cure but never enough, and it has never been enough, to format the pilgrimage towards the formation of analysts, where Paranoia and Pronoia, and by these I mean faith that the modern psychiatry has classified as aspects of psychosis- faith is an illness especially if it is cored on the Act of a glorious leader who can cause desire: Metousiosis is the means to the dark domains of each cause, for, the Ουσία nurtures the feminine object; and if there have been three emissions of analysts, one towards the cure, the second towards the truth, with the magnificent talents of Lacan and Bion, then there is another one that is towards the Act- certainly not for those who are fainthearted: “I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead,” because they are deeds and not Acts.

 

And to the knowing what to do with the oral object, that represents the impossibility of the identifications of the signifier to establish the hunger of love, a love that does not need the erogenous zones as Lacan clearly states in the Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst seminar, here are marked the words to the angel: “To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this: ‘I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot, but because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of  My mouth.”

 

But dear Lord, the Breath cannot be spilled, for it is that which moves and loves the Lunguage- the Πνοή του Λόγου.

On the Liturgy of the Phallus

Leave a reply

‘Ελοΐ Ελοΐ λιμά σαβαχθανί: and yet the Word is not forsaken with the relanguagement of the phallus to which the psychotic subject will inveterate its circumscription to the kinesis of a cause, for, the metric system of a position that has no oscillation and yet it is sexual cannot exist without its binary, mistaken that, that that which cannot be read has been nominated as such, because psychoanalysis has elapsed that those letters having no inscription are not read in the direction of the signifiers, better to murmur doxologized, but, in this displacement’s rhythm, they dimension their form-id-able cry from left to right and in negation to the antithesis of the antonym’s location when it eclipses the linearity of the graph of the signifier’s stasis within the structure∙ and, yes, and that as it has been perceived by the experience of the psychoanalyst’s savoir-faire with the limited devotion to the Organon, which is neither a phallus nor a penis, and who, that he in question, who does not version to recompense the nuisance to inaugurate the proverb’s new truth, once again, one by one, but as the Golden Ass of Apuleius, the asinus aureus that even saint Augustine has been concerned to remark, in his privacy he repeats it, reinventing the signifiers of the wheel: that is the begetting of the position of the supposed subject of idiotic knowledge, surely with the phallus and certainly delicate: it is that which indeed can have the sexual characteristics of time without a phallus∙ and, to this sorrowful conception of a language of a Subject articulating a desire but does not act on it, because the juggler in the king’s temple has avowed that not much can be articulated about desire, even less to act upon it, resulting in an ideal of a speaking subject castrated of its verb afar from the ErgOn, one in the forms of many elevating Rasputin’s fame to that which only the queen knew, to which the Freudian dream would laugh at the false mystery of the statement, that interpretation is dead: for, if the mystery of interpretation has been indemnified, it is because psychoanalysts have been trans-muted into barbarians, foreigners to these new languages and narrative alphabets, for, themselves and their practice is Alien to the real world, with many cured subjects and very few analysts: the letter’s own voice demands that a terrible ear grasp its paradoxical shape, which is flux: this is the Aether allowing to, to he who has no Other to become paranoid∙ on behalf of the issue at hand not been misidentification and neither dis-identification as the body is but a runic transliteration to which desire is dedicated to the altar of the flesh, in perpendicular position but not motion, one to be originated with the blade of the Act for the reason that the knot of a Gordian nature requests to be scarified, when the psychoanalyst can allow his own body to remain on the chair so to introduce the threshold of Λόγος, which is kinesis, perpendicular and not horizontal that is the passage of the signifier: the act in the letter is that which frees those letters and whose sound do not tinkle like feathers the psychoanalyst impressionability because he does not permit to the irony of the voice to shape the activity of the letters, from left to right like numbers, always backwards and chained into the syllabic propositions of the consonant· the Ousia is not an after nor a before, for it is not timed, but harmony equal to the proportion of the modulor and the body inscription of diphthongs, whose union establish that homo-gene-ity which is of the word embodied and from whose faith the signifier is personified: καὶὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο: but never the πνεῦμα: that, that which is a letter destined to breath and not to breed the Same, like the signifier.

 

And he who has a barbarian essence and spells an echo according to the understanding of a structure and not of the diver-a-gency of the alphabet, holding that scepter which is masculine and supposedly further than a given sympathetic meaning, but, a representative of the sybaritic representation of the carnival of the phallus as an antidote to the phenomenology of the gaze, where, or, instead, he who is a diviner of the Logos knows that the apparitions are spelled out by the Voice to this pompe of the signification of the subject of the unconscious, that- and this is what is forgotten because of psychoanalysts’ admiration of the phallus- cannot exist without a Verb: a fecundity sacrament, not of Desiraction and a devouring commemoration of another Tre Ore along the theme of life yet never part of it, reverberating and not verbifying, the trauma of the signifier’s skeleton∙ and, the sibylline depended clauses utter that an object within a cause, that which causes desire, will do better than the phallus, only that the liturgy of Freud’s and Lacan’s signifiers’ as they have been conceived, not through a parthenogenesis but through the sexual position of been or having of the priest, and not of Act and cause, are too much adored from he who still thinks that can have sex with a woman∙ and, because the source, that, that which is inhuman and not bodily, is a circle without a corner to rest, akin to a language and spoken in a parapraxis of desire as a purpose of its speech: and, lo and behold- there, there the Thing tinted lenses its first creation: that which is Lazarus: he who has lived again without the phallus∙ and, in terms of a hypostasis, relating to one Ousia- my dear friend, it is just the configuration of this statement in a different order, for, it is three Ousies and one hypostasis∙ one does not negotiate desire: there are a few letters in the poem put together and produce this famous Act, a signature itself written by your being and that infamous Freudian body∙ for, the inter-cession of the Letter is the principle by which the breath lends a hand and conducts supporters of the Cause who search with a reconciliation with the breath, which is desire: no signifier can mark the body during inhalation.

 

And if we know how to request kindly a question to en-grave a few words, just to smell the oxygen of an empty space, it would have been related to the Freudian construction in terms of the breath: what is actually been constructed if the practice is beyond the father∙ certainly this construction is not the liturgy of the phallus.

On the Kinesis of the Unconscious.

Leave a reply

Regnabo, Regno, Regnavi, Sum sine regno: the letter is Empirical- it is EmpiReal: there is no silence to the drive, unless one cannot hear very well- a true gift for an analyst to grasp the double image of the object whose binary functions can either orient to desire or to jouissance, which is not alone and not mystical,  but with the company of the Other: and because the tachyon, that letter carrying the lights and the letter’s own voice, truly beyond the enlightenment of the imaginary and the image, onto this moving target that moves towards the Βίος of the Heraclitean bow and not in elliptic paradoxes, what is the place of activity of a Cause of desire, which is not a position, is the identification with the object, that which causes desire, not the symptom∙ that my dear unfaithful Thomas, trapped into the circle and the repetition of a meaning yet with the explanations of the Other, locates the kinesis of the unconscious onto the source of the drive and not its tip.

 

And when the object itself  and not its gloominess con-courses the subject, it is not from the phallus that one offers the gift of belief  to an axiom of language, but to the letter that is unparticular inflowing the realm that it is not even uncanny, an EmpyReal to which many an analyst shall be converted into the scale invariant to what can be playacted by a monotonous and not less banausic mouth, that estuary of air of the he who is to speak of ontology with its counterpart, which is deontology, as ethic: and, yet, the candor of the practice is not even that, for, it is a scale invariant without momentum and mass to whose attribute, he, who is the leader of the Arian tribe, shall plead guilty about its musicality, when, in fact himself does not know how to play the piano with the phalanges of the handyman- for intellectuality cannot not offer the prerequisites of the act upon life, which is not a given but can be a creative prosopopoeia, a plasma on its own right, not the subject solicituded within and around the structure.

 

And, if the feet which stand upon a ground dehumidifying an apotheosis, relying to the calumniatory question of sarcasm, of the Where do I start, themselves depict that this deportment of perambulation begins from the matters which are issues of the earth, from that anything forms, debarring that first breath and the Plasmatic appearance of the unconscious in its elemental states of corporeality of a foaming at mouth journeying from the ionized violence of that which is limited by time∙ that is the Γράθμα where the double of the letter has melted at the tip of the tongue and the Γ has passed through the threshold of metousiosis and has been breathed into a Θ, and not  into the halacha of the Jewish law, whose articulation appears to be a letter, to which discourse offers a tube of air present to the scale invariance of the trinity of spatial symmetry, the subject’s reflection, interpretation and rotation: to these the Letter cannot move∙ semiosis and use but not be a Cause∙ and when the object changes positions within the discourse and the body, it is because the subject hides the Parousia of the breathing letters as the so called chameleon assumes the formula of a percolated scalar infinitesimal syllabary with a non-linear interaction to one another since it uses the signifier in resembling a dues ex machine and fools the analyst who thinks he hears very well when he tones his immaculate ear to grasp the harmony of the signifiers, in the same manner that the Ousia of the Aristotelian theories, has been conceived in the time that it was believed the earth was flat- not the Das Ding and neither the subject- leave aside the Ergon∙ and he who is a grand piano thespian, and certainly knows about notes and master signifiers, himself not a master, could have testified in a court of law that the values of the letters is the Niente when the diminuendo has finished, and to where the dark energy which is homousian to the Ousia but not to the breath, an entelechy including the psychoanalytic Act, passageways towards this Everything, which is not simply Real but Apeiron.

 

And here is the question, which is a true mystery, and not a surprise: how does the psychoanalyst intervene on a structure that is plasma? Ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αὐτοῖσιν ἐμϐαίνουσιν, ἕτερα καὶἕτερα ὕδατα ἐπιρρεῖ∙ yes- it is true, but besides the Logos- which is what is unmoved and traps the ear of the analyst into a towards the No, and not towards the conduction of the troparion of the προς-ευχή: that is the orientation of the Kinesis towards desire and the answer to the enigma from where do I start.

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.

On the Reading that is Symphonic.

1 Reply

The Act is the antiphony of jouissance- the phoneme ought to be sang and spelled out∙ a school and an orientation could have create a chorus, at least regarding the direction of a desire, and to the best of our stupidity we could have made some use of the Liturgia Horarum, for, if there is anything to be venerated, that is not the semblance but that desire for the Cause, not its causality, but that which becomes a breath from the puncture, for, the fissure from where desire shall sprang its motion is for no use but for Kinesis and for the Letter, not a waste of a litter certainly but an abysmal aether, offering the trauma’s sacred pinches and tones to the analyst’s desire∙ it is in this asymmetrical manner that the signifier detects and recognizes the analysts, not the other way around, and within this creation, not an existence, analysts are desired to learn a novel alphabet: each time de novo, for, and because every analysand is different, an analyst is dissimilar, as well, to its own shadow.

 

 

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

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

The Duty of Psychoanalysis.

Leave a reply

A duty is not a dept· the duty of psychoanalysis is its commitment to the ethic responsible for providing the practise itself a space within the discourses of civilization- it is the duty towards the symptom’s bronchophony in the direction of that serpentine desire pushing for recognition∙ there cannot be psychoanalysis without civilization, and there cannot be a civilisation without psychoanalysis: more than anything, the analyst is Kinesis, and he precipitates, outside of time, those interventions upon the Letter so that free speech is lawfully recognized: a speech that is perpendicular- nothing more. That motion, not the subject in progress, or in process, is not locked within sessions, neither within the repetitive sounds captured by a wall’s ear- as they say- or behind soundproof doors where one’s hieroglyphic echo is not only not becoming epigraphic, but, it is swallowed by the catatonia of the analyst’s own desire· when analysts speak their voices ought to crumble the walls of Jericho, of that Ιερός Ήχος of the unconscious that is structured like a language but is heard like a Letter: we ought to be at least responsible to carry the burden of our own speech, and raise a voice- not too much of a silence: to raise a voice towards those teeth accountable for producing almighty discourses leading to cloning, that is, those phonemes crashing subjectivity within the cultural discourses denying the subjects’ right to create their own place and their own alphabet- that place that is in-formation: Freud’s staying in Austria until the outmost moment has something to teach regarding this heroic stance, an Act not worthy of an Actor but of an Activist· it is not a support or a submission to the death drive but to life.

 

 

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

By Petros Patounas.

The School of the Freudian Letter Publications.

On the Anonymity of Psychoanalysis.

Leave a reply

The object that acts: you ought to jaw a few letters alleging that the duty for that motion belongs to your desire, even though, God forbid, such a desire is trapped between a xiphoid view of the Other and a master interpreter suffering from otitis: you ought to say, that the duty reliable of that desire guides you, the analyst, to be directed in the treatment and not to direct: you ought to declare, because of that desire, that the Act is anonymous, and the more anonymous it is, the more feminine is transmogrified, and that, there are not only two acts as a technician of psychoanalysis will conclude∙ there is at least another one- besides the act of the analyst and the analysand: there is, intend this plural as an “is,” the Acts of psychoanalysis itself∙ and those are not alone.

 

 

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.