A Streetcar Named ... Anal eroticism
About anal eroticism
Great chemistry usually requires two or more actors, but Christopher Walken is expert at playing solitary souls whose deepest emotional connections are with unseen characters (a fellow soldier in “Pulp Fiction,” a dead Irish boy in “James Joyce’s The Dead”).
As the mysterious, obsessive one-handed man Carmichael in Martin McDonagh’s play “A Behanding in Spokane” Mr. Walken is never more engaging or empathetic (or hilarious) than during his five-minute conversation — unusually long for Broadway — with his offstage, elderly mother. Carmichael has lived most of his life with this woman, and Mr. Walken is by turns annoyed, aghast and revealingly tender during this one-sided conversation about his mother’s fall out of a tree. “I’ll tell you what your problem is, Ma, you wanna know what your problem is? You’re anal, that’s what your problem is,” Mr. Walken says into the phone. After a beat his voice adopts an edge of weary frustration that you imagine is as old as Carmichael. “Yes, you are anal.”
The mother-son talk is not only a key plot point — she inadvertently turns him away from killing one of the other characters — but also a master class by Mr. Walken on how to play a confrontation all on your own.
Author: Paul PAPAHAGI, Psychoanalyst
DATE LINE: Saturday 1 April 2006
Keywords: Hysteria | Upsetting
I. - As an introduction, a certain freshness
The author of this narrative case, Mickael Joseph Eisler, belongs to the first generation of analysts and its purpose is not devoid of freshness is the case even if it sets for an illustration of anal eroticism . Moreover, latent homosexuality and anal eroticism back into leitmotiv who vied.
It took a lot Lacan to walk away from this heavy burden of the origins, remains his 1938 text on the complex family warning signs.
Read carefully, this scrupulous observation where the clarity is second to nothing speculative tendencies of the theorist of the first hour, we can easily switch from a wonder some irritation.
Where the author is he went for that famous anal eroticism which, like a tram up to each step in the text? First in a magazine intended to be exhaustive in the analytic literature, but also in its structure it seems royally ignored, which can only remind psychiatrists of the classical age to lose themselves in as of endless stories of cases, while believing themselves outside what they were talking. Not surprising that two prominent experts have found the Papin sisters as normal crazy can not do as well as his act. It remains a very topical not to stick at trial Outreau ...
While our strict Hungarian psychologist is not going to conclude that his patient was suffering from an obsessional neurosis and hysteria as is so obvious it can not avoid the mention, it still goes up to cite an article by Jones entitled "Hatred and anal eroticism in the obsessional neurosis", which explains the lapse of Lacan - who did was perhaps not - who calls Hasler which in free translation could be something like "The Hate."
In contrast to many distortions found in the text of Lacan can testify to his irritation to read. And when a student of Lacan, Jean-Jacques Gorog, for whom the problem of male hysteria is the real anatomical difference between the sexes, which found against this observation to a diagnosis of obsessional neurosis, in rejecting the Lacan's diagnosis, my astonishment was at its height.
This is an obsessive who suffer shooting pains, loss of consciousness and an ugly fantasy fellatio, incontrovertible proof of his homosexuality and passive latent. I just cartoon.
I. - If
“Anal-Sex Week” Landlord Maxes Out
posted by on July 17 at 4:29 PM
Remember Lou Novak, the landlord who had to resign his post as VP of the Rental Housing Association after he made a bigoted comment about the Lifelong AIDS Alliance?
In case you don’t, I’ll refresh your memory:
In case you hadn’t realized, last week was anal sex week in Olympia.That, at least, was the publicly proclaimed assessment of Lou Novak, a prominent apartment-building owner. Novak’s eagerness to express his views within earshot of HIV-positive citizens, including two children, who traveled to the state capital last week to lobby for greater AIDS prevention and care funding not only provoked a confrontation that led to an investigation by Capitol security, but has also provoked a minor firestorm among legislators.
A handful of advocates were exiting the main legislative building when they say they passed a man who loudly offered his troglodytic opinion of their activities. The leader of the contingent, Susie Saxton, executive director of CareBearers, a hospice organization in Yakima, was wearing a red “AIDS Awareness Day” T-shirt. She was accompanied by two other adults, as well as a 13-year-old girl and a 16-year-old who had contracted HIV from his mother, who had herself become infected through a blood transfusion during kidney surgery in the late 1980s.
“Looks like its anal sex week,” the man said as they passed him, according to Saxton.
Guess which politician he’s maxed out to?
Dino Rossi.
Since December 2007, Novak has donated $3,200 to Rossi’s gubernatorial campaign.
However, the donation shouldn’t surprise anyone familiar with Rossi’s record on gay rights.
In 2003, he voted against legislation that would have banned discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
In 2004 1996, he attacked an opponent, Kathleen Drew, by saying she had “sponsored a gay and lesbian art exhibit in the state capitol.” The exhibit was meant to honor the late Sen. Cal Anderson.
He voted for the Defense of Marriage Act as a state legislator and supporting George W. Bush in his call for a US constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.
I can only recall the book by Jean-Pierre Winter, The wandering of the flesh. The author discusses male hysteria in Lacanian and refers to Charcot and his case of male hysteria.
This employee of the trams, a Wattman, as they were called in Miteleuropa Freud, suffering from painful crises after falling from his streetcar traveling at full speed.
Carefully, the author notes that crises occur about every two weeks and last fourteen to sixteen hours.
The patient was radiographed which has made the strongest impression. He was disappointed not to have been made then, but to remove what?
At the hospital it was concluded that a diagnosis of traumatic hysteria, so the case seems typical. However, the diagnosis is by Eisler, regarded as too superficial. We must look deeply, we must dig in search of hidden treasure, anal eroticism, which is reflected in the dream No. 1, produced at the end of observation. As the old man with his cane, he locates the position of the analyst in the transference, not without a certain gift of prophecy would surely have liked to Jung - the advent of some Jungian named "Jacques Lacan" which Contrary to Jung, did not challenge his transfer to Freud, managing to hold even in analysis with Loewenstein, for 6 years at 5 sessions per week of fifty minutes very accurate, what's to be for the young and very fiery Lacan I'll give you that Christopher, a real torture.
Both symptomatic acts which the author maintains that we go "crazy attitude" to the "passive homosexual behavior" will conclude with an attack of vertigo orienting certissime anal eroticism. Same thing with a dream in which he is bitten by a lion (mouth instead of the anus) or one where a young brother threatening him with a rifle (fear of penetration per ano So the younger brother = passive homosexuality - what delicious irony!). We are in the "archaic mythical" as the author speaks.
The patient adapts without too many problems in the analytic situation, although we noted the author, it carries a "particular form of confinement."
Dreams of Flight - but no pilferage - flotation Eisler put on the trail of a heightened narcissism.
But here is how we presented this carrier exacerbated anal eroticism:
"The patient gives the impression of a man who trusted him, who knows what he wants and who dutifully cares to consolidate its position ... it is very moderate in his views which he can convince his comrades': no trace of hesitation or inhibition tiresome rituals.
Conclusion, I quote:
"This is how he was able to sublimate and offset a large part of his homosexual libido."
We understand why Lacan could show great sympathy for some patients and a great annoyance in respect of some psychoanalysts ("I'm not an understanding man," he used to say).
Further Eisler added:
"Moreover, the patient shows an increasing appetite for culture." Here we find the love of knowledge that rarely fails in hysteria.
But back to our Eisler (s):
"The sublimated anal eroticism shines here, betrays itself also in a keen interest in the mechanisms of material life."
You can not accuse this author of a lack of clarity but can we speak in this case of demerger of the death instinct as in obsessional neurosis?
If you want to stay strictly Freudian one can only say, but I anticipate that the discharge is on the oral drive, I will return in time.
The patient has told us the author, a keen desire to be recognized. He is the eldest son of a peasant couple had fourteen children, eight are still alive. Many deaths among siblings, and many births the mother had been the lot of this patient. Sibling rivalry, rivalry, nothing extraordinary. His grandparents (father) lived with the family.
We are told that his grandfather and father excelled with a strong sense of justice.
The author points out the frequent changes of jobs: baker, laboratory, a tram driver and controller indicating interests and fears remain compatible with the structure of hysteria. Besides the author himself mentions, but without dwelling, occupied as he is by the anal eroticism of the subject, to please the analyst provides material on its rather long anal eroticism d especially since, as I pointed out, repression is elsewhere.
We learn later that the trigger of neurosis was not trauma itself but the radiological examination. Besides, we have the opportunity to propose an interpretation strongly suggested by the story of the fantasy of the patient later, because there is a logical link between the fantasy of the patient and the iterative application of x-ray examinations. This is all the repression that is more typical. While in an obsessional neurosis repression remains problematic.
Even that is occupied by the patient's anal eroticism, the analyst can not fail to notice that the crisis mimics childbirth (hysterical pantomime). While only a pantomime which can be obsessive to the death.
What the patient could expect from any of the radiological evidence if he had a baby in her belly and the surgical procedure that was followed could consist of nothing more than a caesarean section to extract the fruit.
Even if this is anatomically impossible, there is a difference between fantasy and delusion, and delusion is that any part, delirium is compatible with the presence of a fantasy at his side.
On this, Eisler returned to his favorite interest - you guessed it - anal eroticism is passionate: gastric, obstipation, is what we hold dear psychoanalyst.
Again, it is a matter "of mono-symptomatic hysteria", but return to anal eroticism via sadism and compassion reaction.
The patient married a woman who had an illegitimate child that the patient agrees, but the result of jealousy, narcissistic (again for the interest so seductive unconscious passive homosexuality). And the hope of having a male child becomes the evidence, I quote, a "huge narcissistic self-love. Yet another child excremental and everything is so expensive in this anal eroticism, which contains all of the fantasy of pregnancy according to the logic: since he is a man is like anal eroticism in the infantile sexual theories' intestinal child was not also present in girls.
The X-ray itself is connected to the "homosexual sensitivity" of the patient in case we have not noticed, it is obvious, see ... She has unbalanced "substantially libidinal aspirations of the patient"
I'll leave it at that my comments on the case to say something about another aspect of the case.
III. - Choice of hysteria for man
STUFF I CURRENTLY LOATHE (in no particular order)
- Drunk douche-bags that expose me to their shitty rap styling's over west coast hits from the late 90’s. It seems like every time I’m hanging out, enjoying my buzz, these fuckers come out of the woodwork. The second Tupac, Too Short, E-40, Snoop, or Dr. Dre comes out the speakers, a huddle of jackasses forms & they start spewing their generic flows & congratulating each other on their pathetic attempts to emulate actual artists. At best, these stupid displays are mediocre re-hashes of lines we’ve all heard before & at worse, they are just a bunch of “I don’t give a fuck, though”s and “I don’t love a hoe”s without any rhyme or reason to the crap stumbling out of their mouths. I actually love hip-hop & have mad respect for clever wordplay, so it pains me to hear these idiots. For the love the Westside and everything that is the shiz-nit, don’t become one of them.
- Women’s pant sizes. They vary depending on the store you buy them in, the company that makes them, and the style of the pant itself. It would be nice to have a universal go-to size for all pant purchases, but apparently that makes too much sense for the fashion Powers That Be. Instead, they’d rather keep us uncertain of our all-too-important measurements and make us waste countless hours in dressing rooms, trying on three different sizes of each pant we might consider purchasing. And what the fuck is a size 00?
-
- Being subjected to crap from creepy old dudes whenever I go outside unaccompanied. Whether I am riding my bike or walking down the street, even if I am reading a book or listening to my mp3 player, male passer-bys old enough to be my father (or grandfather) feel the need to spout off bullshit that makes me uncomfortable & definitely un-flattered. “Hey Beautiful!”, “Where are you headed, Pretty Lil’ Thang?”, “Smile, Baby Doll!”. This shit coming out of the mouths of men that have no chance in hell of actually hittin’ this because they’re 50+ years old, obviously junkies or crack fiends, overweight scuzz-balls… just pisses me off. Depending on the setting, I might flip them The Bird or tell them to “fuck off”, but this is not always possible since most men can pose a threat to my health. In the interest of self preservation, I sometimes have to swallow my pride, continue down the road, & ignore it when he inevitably calls me a ‘bitch’ for not responding to his commentary. Fuck those pervy geezers for making me (and every other female) deal with that shit.
- The entire American Pie series. The movies are fucking retarded, lowest common denominator, predictable swill & the next dipshit that suggests I watch any of them because they are “hella funny” is going to get a bitch slap. And a few Netflix suggestions.
- Feminist stereotypes. It is stupid to assume feminists are all ugly, hairy, man-hating, bra-burning, humorless lesbians. Heterosexual women have to deal with male misogynistic bullshit on a much more personal level than do lesbians (since we fuck them, date them, and fall in love with them), so we tend to have a vivid understanding of how fucked the patriarchy is (which nurtures our feminist ideologies). The “ugly” and “hairy” stereotypes imply that feminists are just angry because they can’t bed a man. This is retarded when one considers just how easy it is to pull a guy. Even the ugliest and hairiest lady can score! Propagators of that myth have obviously never fucked a feminist because sex is much more fun when the girl doesn’t hate herself or her pussy. As for “humorless”, it should be expected that women won’t be amused by rape or spousal abuse jokes. If that means we lack humor, so be it. Next time a dude doesn’t understand why I’m not laughing at one of those “jokes”, I’ll just throw down some of my best graphic Anal Rape/Castration comedy.
A confusion is strong among analysts, namely female = hysteria. Easily forgotten that the man is hysterical. I told you earlier that the case of male hysteria come down to some analysts, not least to psychosis. The author himself draws parallels between his case to Schreber, while for Lacan is a good reason to illustrate the difference between paranoia and hysteria, the confusion could come from the character of the hysteric not always convenient.
I remembered there is little that is hysterical and human side that does not prevent pregnancy or in the life of the hysteric experienced as a narcissistic moment, a moment of heightened phallicism. So what would prevent a man to have a fantasy of pregnancy while remaining a man? That is the meaning feminization, meets Lacan. But while the fantasy is determined by the imaginary signifier remains on the side. It is a window on reality says Lacan. The phenomenon of couvade described in many men. Is this a hysterical moment in the life of every man?
But man does not get stabbed in the head by his own mother, keeping it to himself, and yet it is a trauma that, in combination with the scene of childbirth in the next, with the Children in pieces in a "wooden manger, seems sufficient to have precipitated a hysteria in a man.
This paradox oh! This hysteria, with symptoms that necessitated a psychoanalysis, has allowed this man (also with manhood rather triumphant - he became a labor leader) not falling into the sex-specific, ie normopathie the obsessive, which she, ironically, is located next woman in the patterns of sexual differentiation, so the side of the unitary trait and repetition.
With his fantasy of pregnancy became an exceptional man and this earned him the privilege of entering history through a man named Jacques Lacan.
But before getting to him a brief foray into the trick of the analyst:
IV. - The anal eroticism is there a trick of the analyst?
There is in the title of this paper a pearl juxtaposed with a bullshit, the analyst course. His trick is a shit that does not stop him producing a pearl.
I begin with the pearl. Under a picture of traumatic hysteria a fantasy of pregnancy in a man.
One objection to this gem: the trauma is a tautology because any hysteria is traumatic.
So hysteria is no doubt why we have embarked on this bullshit he introduced rather emphatically: "clinical contribution about anal eroticism." Simply because at the time was anal eroticism in fashion. It was not something the analyst but of Freud and other Jones service.
Students then applied Eisler was a tour de force of male hysteria seasoning sauce obsessive and Freud found the result quite valid where one would have pushed Ferenczi and screaming.
One more point before I did come to Lacan. Our instinct tells us about Eisler olfactory. Obviously it's not going to do a partial drive, such as oral and anal drive but still. I quote: "smell the drive need not be repeated in this context since its correlation with the anal is almost universal."
But is it a drive in the sense that a drive always misses its object (the object of Lacan)? And is it an object of the body of the Other? It is clear that the object is not always smelling an object of the Other's body even though the mother may well make use of fragrance as sexual fireworks. Secondly it is easy to refute the fact that smell is a drive for a "no" (cf. The Perfume Suskind) Never misses its purpose
Now that smell like function can be invested by a partial drive that disrupts the function of course. And that smell can make the game of the anal drive why not? In The Perfume Suskind we see and smell is to serve the death instinct exists and if it is possible to separate it from Eros. Lacan thinks at first and then thinks better of Eros and Thanatos to consider are the two forces that drive currency named.
V. - The insight provided by Lacan
In his seminar on Psychoses Lacan does the observation that Eisler "just" the place it deserves. After lighting that eliminates psychosis, "no trace of hallucinatory elements" is how Lacan speaks of the author:
"... HASLER Joseph, a school psychologist in Budapest ... "and a little further:" Man is part of the first generation analytic phenomena he sees with great freshness, crawl up and down this observation. .. already involved in the space of systematisation starts hitting ... observation and practice ... which will focus on the analysis of resistances. Hasler is already extremely impressed by the new psychology ofego... He was very interested in my subject, his style of behavior, etc.. "
Before seeing how Lacan takes up the account about the author on the subject I propose to return to structural point of view with which Lacan discusses the case Eisler. I quote:
"I told you about the Other of speech, as it recognizes the subject and it is recognized. This is a neurosis, the decisive factor, not the disruption of such oral sex, anal or genital. We know only too well how we handle the embarrassment of a homosexual relationship, since we find evidence permanence in subjects with the great diversity in terms of instinctual relations [1]. It is a question for the subject in terms of meaning, in terms of To Be or Not to Be, In terms of his being. "
I think, now, back on the subject of observation, the good Wattman, in the words of Lacan, I quote:
"This subject is quite well suited. It has relationships with peers are those of a trade unionist, a little leadership, and who is very interested in what binds tightly to them, "and a bit further:" You try to see qu'Hasler find the features of the anal character ... "
It stops where it might be taken as a slip of Lacan if it was not a subtle allusion to trick him, the analyst slips in its observation, something that would grow to a obsessional neurosis. In what follows in about Lacan Eisler name is spelled correctly. I quote: "a closer look at this observation. The outbreak of neurotic symptoms in appearance, which necessitated the intervention of the analyst assumes no doubt a wake of trauma that has something. In the subject's childhood, trauma we find a shovel ... Eisler does not fail to score at that moment, something decisive had to occur, since at the discretion of the family tradition would have it, after this incident, started to suck his thumb. [2]. You see castration-regression. There are others. But there is a little accident (my emphasis), we realize that with the release of material, that what was decisive in the decompensation of neurosis was not an accident, but radiographic examinations [3].
It deserves two comments: 
In the following Lacan can punctuate:
"You can tell the anal sex, or homosexual, or this or that, but these elements are taken in the question being asked - I am or not someone capable of childbearing [4] This issue is obviously at the Other ... as symbolic and not reactivated as imagination ... It is therefore an issue that precipitated "the decompensation of neurosis."
Therefore, Lacan can move a pawn in his new context, I quote:
"In addition the feminized character of the discourse of the subject [5] Is so immediately grasped that when our analyst expressed about the first items he obtained from him the remark that the doctor who examined him told his wife: "I can not seem to realize that a. It seems as if he were a woman I would understand much better”. »
This is the subject's discourse is dominated and not the subject itself. As for the remark of the doctor it is a key and Lacan adds:
"When you have this key, all the subject's life is re-ordered in its outlook. An example might of its anal preoccupations. But around what is his interest in excrement? Around the question whether there can be in the excrements of fruit kernels still able to lift a once planted.
From the foregoing, we find that for Lacan, an analysis is a spawning ground in the symbolic key finding in the aftermath, rearrange the material produced by the "task analysis", to use a term a later Lacan (cf. The psychoanalytic act).
Lacan will loop as it should be its first foray into the soil of this man of the campaign, at the beginning, the last accident, I quote:
"Let's finish where we started, the last accident. It falls from the tram that has become for him a device significant, it falls, it s'accouche itself. The single theme dominates the fantasy of pregnancy but as what? As meaning, the context shows, the issue of integrating the masculine function, the function of the father. "
The allusion to Freud's young lesbian, I think it fairly transparent.
VI. - In conclusion: the question of hysteria and the node Bo
The question of the hysteric to Lacan is a structural phenomenon as, like all structures, it is located on one edge.
At the end of this journey by tram, it is conceivable that the patient has not yielded an Eisler kidney to these "golden mouth" hysterical, women or men more often which (the) s will be honored Lacan.
It remains for me to make some remarks about Stecriture of hysteria on the node Bo.
As appears from the diagram below, near hysteria on the edge between two symbolic breaks from reality. This edge first crosses the fields of the imagination where the operation of repression, the unconscious is constituted.
The unconscious will lead the opening round of the imagination that contains the fields of the unconscious. The edge is where symbolic hysteria will then go round the fields of symbolism that Lacan refers to as that of death, and before the second cut at the real edge crosses the fields of symbolic phallus, ie name father.
It is noteworthy that hysteria, schizophrenia and sadism are on the same side, but that of schizophrenia as sadism, it is separated by two breaks of reality.
For schizophrenia symbolic crosses the edge of the field and suffered the actual bombing of the minefields. The words become things.
In contrast, the imaginary edge through the same field has a real diplomatic immunity because of the predominance of imagination over reality.
But the symbolic reality is a real minefield.
The hysteric, whose mouth fertilizes the fields and harvest the imaginary flowers on his seduction. But because of the trauma that constitutes his life happens "on the brink of death, age and a second wall trauma of watching the return of age. Divided between love of wisdom and knowledge between the horror of repression and its return, the hysteric is well positioned to produce new knowledge.
One last thing. What makes possible structures Stecriture clinical Node Bo transfer? What is the smallest common denominator between neurosis, psychosis and perversion? The answer is Freudian or it will not. There are three of repression in Freudian structures: neurosis, psychosis and perversion, except that it adds in psychosis foreclose the father's name, lie in the perversion of reality sex. In obsessional neurosis added insulation and reaction formations. In the phobia the failures of repression led to the creation of a symptom that does not prevent the release of anxiety, as in the obsessional neurosis. Only in hysteria success of repression leads to the creation of a symptom that prevents about anxiety. But if repression is successful, it is the metaphor paternal spleen. There goes the failures for the constitution of the symptom, which is inseparable from the constitution of the subject.
Whether the repression that misses in the three Freudian structures is the possibility of finding formations of the unconscious, whatever the clinical structure of the subject. So the unconscious in psychosis is not entirely open-and, finally, the subject is not without perverse unconscious because he dreams, made lapses and missteps as anyone. Repression is a universal mechanism.
See online: Read the article by Michael Joseph Eisler on the site Liliane Fainsilber: "The Taste of the psychoanalysis
PS
You can read the French translation of the text of Michael Joseph Eisler, "Under the Table of traumatic hysteria a fantasy of pregnancy in a man. Clinical contribution to anal eroticism, "the site of Liliane Fainsilber:" The Taste of the psychoanalysis "(see hyperlink below).
Text German 
English Text:
This text is discussed by Jacques Lacan in his seminar on PsychosesDuring the meeting of March 14, 1956.http://feed101.photobucket.com/albums/m76/mrjyn/account.rss
Posted via email from Dogmeat
