essays hasbeenttansttari'smostinfluential transversalitE andLa . ,,.lI
psychoanalysis, partisans. Here proposing to bringtheir crucial the
1:;i;lj-.1; 'l' ,;; ;l i
DI,]EDATE TO DFOPSTTEi
= € t-
Frr
years Molecalar those DavidCoopel
C':)
lr-
tt0 and thenew
t-
D
=, Fl'l
ct =
u.K. f3.95 AUST.$10.95
(recommended) N.Z. s13.50 cAIrt. $9.95 u.s.A. $6.95
HOL RC 455 G8 1984
(,,{r--r
A l lo r b i sC a s c a d Ael l i a n cFea t r o n s : 3 week loan, 1 renewal poticy. iinesaccoi'ding to Library Overdue Replacemenr charge: fee 975+ g15 processing r n o u r :W A S H I N G T O NS T A T EU N I V E R S I T Y - P r . , l l m a n
PTACEC ON HOLD SHELF
Contents
Introduction by David Cooper Sepulchrefor an OedipusComplex r. Institutional
Psychotherapy
Transversality
II
The Group and the Person
24
Anti-Psychiatryand Anti-Psychoanalysis
+5
N{ary Barnes,or Oedipusin Anti-Psychiatry Money in the Analytic Exchange
6o
Psychoanalysis and the StrugglesofDesire
6z
The Role of the Signifierin the Institution Towards a VIicro-Politics of Desire
Bz
z. Towards a New Vocabulary Machine and Structure
III
The Planeoi'Consistency
r20
IntensiveRedundanciesand ExpressiveRedundancies
r30
Subjectless Action
r35
Machinic Propositions
t+4
ConcreteMachines
I54
Meaning and Power
r63
3. Politics and Desire Causality,Subjectivityand Historv Students,the I\l[adand 'Delinquents'
t75 208
The Micro-Politicsof Fascism
2t7
Becoming a Woman
233
lntroduction
Millions and Millions of PotentialAlices the State SocialDemocratsand Euro-Communistsvis-i-vis
.- "J 6"
Molecr-rlarRevolution and Class Struggle
253
Plan for the Planet
242
zGz
(withEricAlliez) 273 CapitalisticSystems,Stntcturesand Processes z88 Glossary Index
29r
At present,Fdlix Guattari is undoubtedlybestknown in the English-speaking world from his hrst work with Gilles Deleuze(tglz), rranslaredas Capitalism andSchipphrenia : TheAnti-Oedipus. With this collection of translatedessays,derived from two books, Ps7(Maspero, r97e) and La RiraLutionmoliculaire chanalyse et transuersalitd (Editions Recherches,Sdries'Encre', tg77), readerswill now have an opportunity to becomeacquaintedwith Guattari'searliestnon-conjointwritings.The essays from the first book range over the ,vearsr g55 to rg7o. La Rir)llutionmohiculaire, a l t h o u g hp u b l i s h e di n r 9 7 7 ,w a s ' c o n d e n s e ad n d a u g m e n t e d ' i na v e r s i o no f r g 8 o ( E d i t i o n s r o l r 8 ) . I n t 9 7 9 G u a t t a r i p u b l i s h e da m o r e s y s t e m a t i c , theoretical work, L'lnconscientmachinique(Editions Recherches).With Deleuze he has aiso written two shorter books: KaJka:plur unelittiraturemineure (r975) and Rhi
z
Introduction
in the casesmentionedhere) the resultscan be impressive;when lesswell done,disastrous. Fclix Guattari was bv origin a psychoanalystin the Lacan schoolbut was from very earlyon. This engagementbecameincreasingly politically'engaged articlrlatedthrough and after the eventsof Mav r968, in which he plal'ed a role. But also through the rg6os he worked at La major behind-the-scenes clinic south of Paris u'here he elaboratedhis idea of psvchiatric Borde 'institutionai aualvsis' as a methodological critique of institutional psvchotherapy'which had been the ideologyofthe clinic sinceits inauguration, in which Guattari participated,in r953. Sinceits formation in r975 he has been centrally active in the International Network Alternative to Psychiatrv.He has had somecriticismlevelledat him by somecirclesin the 'alternative' movement becauseof his associationwith La Borde, where electroshock(ECT) and insulin coma are stiil practised.He is not a doctor and has never given thesetreatmentsto anyone,but more importantly his 'institutional analysis' has the specific aim of'depassing' politically the practice of institutional psychotherapy.His concept of transversalityis 'transference'(the psychoanalytic worked out as a critique ofinstitutional concept). What he means by transversalityin the institutional context Guattari explains in the chapter of that name in this book. The word, horvever,also connotesan intellectualmobility acrossdisciplineboundaries and aboveall the establishmentofa continuum through theory,practiceand militant action. Our aurhor has also met w,ithcriticism lrom somecirclesof the organized In lact there are few people who have left in terms ol gauchiste'spontaneism'. thought out so con.sistently,critically aird self-criticallythe problem of 'dangerousmyth' spontaneousaction, arriving at the conclusionthat it is a that we have to rar.rscendin a multiplicity of new practicesthat he specifies'I can alsotestili'to his generosityand to thevery phvsicalrisksthat he has run in his defenceof dissident Italian leftists accused,rvithout proofs being brought, of lirrks with terrorism. Today, after the left ascensionto power in Franceon ro May r98r, F6lix Guattari is involvedrvith publicly important questions.srrchas the Free Radio svstem (for which he has waged a long strugglein Europe)as an indicatorofa new st,vlein masscommunicationthat constitutesa rationalchallengeto rationaladministrators,u'ho at lastseemto be genuinelyconcernedwith problemsof democracyat the baseof society. 'antiGuattari's position is not, as some people have seemedto think, theoretical'but representsa new type oftheoreticalactivity that would avoid the simpiilfing reduction to containing structuressuch as the dyadic and triadic situations of psychoanalysis(transferencesituation, Oedipal complex) or of C. S. Peirce'srelational logic (to which he often refers).The particular nature of the rigour that Guattari is developingcan be seen in
Introduction 3 L'lncorucient machinique, in his most recentstill unpublished writings and in the chapter on 'Capitalist Systems,Structuresand Processes'(as yet unpublished in French) in this book. He tells me that his view of theory is that it has an essentiallycreative function, like art. The aim of theory is to produce new, more heuristictheoreticalobjectsand he quotesthe inventionofpolyphonyin music. In the left France of rg8z everyonewants to invent new theoretical objects.Guattari hassucceededin inventingsome- in fact quite a number of them. In this writing, individuals,groupsand'the society'arenot denied,but the desiring machines operate in the spacesbetweenthese 'entities'. Guattari's writing itselfissuesfrom this sort ofinterspace and is directed back again into these'spacesbetween', which are the spaceswhere things are agendes.Then, by a curious but comprehensiblelogic, the writing itself becomesagencement. The reader will have to rvork out the meaning of this term lrom the text itself and the Glossary,l but I shall simply note here that one of the ways that Guattari vsesagencemenl is closeto the way that Ert ing Goffman describesthe everydaylife organization of experience,in FrameAnajsis tor example. But if one searchesfor analogies between Guattari's position and positions in 'Anglo-Saxon'social thought,one is hard-pressedto find equivalences ro the conceptof rule in, say, ethno-methodologyor in P. Winch's Wittgensteinorientated rule-following approach. The closestone can get is in the conception ofa'plane of consistency'that Guattari develops. The questionfor Guattari, and the restof us, is how to undo the erstwhile emancipatory rhetoric of much of the seriesof social revolutionary a{hrmations of the r96osand early r97os.How to re-think what thought might be. We may havewidely differenrresponses ro this question,bur one thing is sure: from now on, in no conceivablelvay can Fdlix Guattari's extensiveand intenseresponsebe left out ofaccount. The selectionof articlesin this book deliberatelyomits a number of pieces, all ofthem interestingbut having many local references directedat a French public. The English-languagereader may find some difficulty with the author's terminology, though theseearlier writings by no means present the problem of Guattari's later and conjoint work. One might object ro someof the language and remark that there is a perfectly good philosophical and scientificlanguagethat has by no meansbeenexhaustedthrough 2,5ooyears of history,but we should norjump to the conclusionthar Guattari is guilty of stylisticpen,ersitv.As with Deleuzehis totally explicit aim is to desrructurea consciousness and a rationality over-sureofitselfand thus too easyprey to subtle,and not so subtle,dogmatisms. The boundariesbetweenthe forms olhuman and non-humanmatter that t. Referenceshould be made ro the verl,useful and lucid account ol'agencementgivenh Dialogue.r: GillesDeleuze,ClairePamet,!-lammarion, r977, pp. 84-9r.
4
Inroductlon
Fdlix that clear-cut'Ifwe chooseto foliow we encounterin the world are never we is.because it regions of ambiguitv Guattari in his nornadisrnthrough emerges that clarity rewarding u'-t t"rnittttttlu elimpse from very early on ihroucl, this highlv orieinal rr'riting'
Sepulchrefor an Oedipus Complexr
DAV'D COOPER
In the form ofa dedication to Lucien Sebag and Pierre Clastres Death, my lriend, you know. But what death?The death we talk about, the comfortofsleep at the last, or the dead end offinality that peopledon't talk about so muchl When I was six or seventhere was a long period when I rvokeup every night with the samenightmare- a Lady in black. Shewas coming towards my bed. I was terrifi,edof her, and my terror woke me up. I was alraid to go back to sleep.Then, one evening, my brother lent me his air-gun; he said I must simply shoot her if she came back. She never came again. But what really surprisedme, I remember clearly, is that I did not in fact load the (real) gun. This led o{Iin two directions at once. In the direction of the garden - that is ol the signified - it was my aunt Emilia, my father's sister, with her black name and her black clothes, a truly horrible woman; and in the direction of the courtyard - that is of the signifier - it was the wardrobe with the mirror on it facing my bed, in my parents' bedroom. But ol coursel The words themselvesexplained it: l'armoire,la Dameennoir,la Damedemoire,l'arme noire, I'armoise,lesarmesdu moi, la Mouise.2In the thirties, my father had gone bankrupt,and, with the assistance olthis aunt, Emilia, he had setout to raise angora rabbits: betweenthe crash and the slump, rve ended up eating the rabbits. Papa was on the vergeofsuicide, but ofcourse there were the children to consider. . . Death and the mirror. I 'vho was there and who neednot have beenthere. I am all there. I am all not there. I am all or nothing. Then there was the dog. It had bitten me or knocked me over on the gravel outside the big house at Maigremont, my Aunt Germaine's (sister of my maternal grandmother) . It rvasjust in lront of a large, gloomy ground-floor room, where there rvas a billiard table and one of those things br trying clothes on, jackets or dresses, I forget, a headless body, a body that feit nothing if you stuck a knife into it, on a wooden sland, wirh a wooden ball on top of it. Later on I linked it up with'corpse', 'body', rvhich I found in an r. Published in the issueof Clazgeentirled'Diraison, disir'. z. The wardrobe, the Ladv in black. the Lady in moiri, the black weapon, wormwood, rhe weaoonsof the self. the Deoression.
6
Sepulchrelor an Oedipus Complex
real skv-blue'Still later I made the Enelish vocabularywith a blue cover,a Body' coJnectionrvith Deleuze'sorganless unweaned' Real teeth,not just the humped gums ol the up without.noticing have.picked must I to"ttthii.tg so,-,ndles', Vi..ii, lvirrg here' The dog's garden the in Death t o*'uug.r. ,n".-ori., of No'-u'"li dog in the dark' A the edge' over leap to waiting ,..rf-r.e?"g on the balcon)-, to.tell me trying '{ dog uttering' Nom rlu chien,in th. nume of the iather' steps down.the coming dog s.limy something.Dogswith a cogitn'Andthen that of death totems words, animated ut th..niof tis olildados.'Ammals, It swellsup like a frog' It A dove, in anothergardcn (my paternaluncle's)' eagle l fire' over and. over i. u,.,.ugl.' Mv father's gan' A huge,^tt*ifyilq getsnowhere trying tcr Chaplin again. {i'is like a tlumm2.I"t'sno gooJ' Charlie thinking about this After lamp gas a in head ) t.,iiti.,.6un,. (It wedgeshis the eaglewere two and dove the that realized finally I enJ lr."t" f"t duy, on bitsofmvoldaddress(ruedel'Aigle,laGarenneColombe)-simpll' tryng to home territory evenwhile part of him is 'be .,o.r,ilglu. Tt.t. child clinging hguse?.1!e parents' my from come I didn't if I who wouli ;;;;"";"i'. deaclbirdfliesaway'Iamme.Adeathinstinctrrnleashed|orgood.Andthis time the Qnaginary)gun rrlatloaded' more dog-turdson the gravel lt is There u,ereno more ambivalentdogs,no not both in the sameplace' And the iove o. all or nothins. It is the .ugl" A perr"erselUanicheisrn' then, whateve, hupp.nt,''it is notl.ring'nothing' cousin'splatein (maternal) open,like the igg on mv chilclhoodhome broker.r apart' like the set home ,n. frig lrur.rnent kitchen at MaigremoJChildhood kitchen' ofanother corner the in table oil-clo"th-covered " the gardenwith the birds They I spentsix months with Uncle Charlesof when I left, thev thought he cancer. werervaitinglor him to Ji. t.l. liad lung to my father's famil;' home back went never I l'rad only a few dal's to live' again my piano alwaysstood:idea of A great empty spaceagainstthe wall where that thing like an island crossroads' a a vacuole. Outside iit ""t'' Friendly Society hall' of the exit the opposite overhangingthe pavement there' leaning against the Furtl.reralong. a big piano shof' Lucien Sebag.was I don't know But he had alreadv wail. It w.aseither beforeor after his suicide' stayedthere- but.then' he had certainly he wall' And ;;; ;".t the Oedipal to know' Inside' there was my iu. *o.. reason than I didl I didn't want ups.tairs'perhaps- or perhaps he *oth., on the ground floor' NI.vfather was like my Paternal grandfather. I had already gone - no ont ftnt* rvhere'Just it' done hal'e neverknew trim, but he shouldn't post-officeThey are ciosing' Nlama behincla cashier'swindorv'A country her accountbooks l beseech' I get therejust in time' Or too late' She closes Sh!sheindicatesrl'ithherheadadooronlrerrightthatopensontodarkness.
Sepulchre lor an Oedipus Complex
7
Silence.Panic. HE mustn't hear. It should be shut; it's all over. He? Who? Why, my father surely, lying on his death bed. He is waiting for her to join him. There's a problem with the electric connection- the lampis going to go out; it's all over. In the nick of time I manageto reconnectthe thing. I'm nine; it is a few months belore the outbreak of war. I am in Normandy, at my (maternal)grandmother's.We are listeningro rhe 'traitor of Stuttgart', Jean Hdrold Paquis. My grandfather (grandmother has remarried), a vast and kindly old man, is sitting on the toilet. The door is open so that he can hear the radio. N{y cutting-out box is by his feet - little paper dolls I make clothesfor. Grandpa's head hangs right down, onto his knees,and his arms flop besidehim. Is he touchingmy toys?I want to shoutour to him. Silence.I turn my head, slowly - an eterniry - towards rhe light on the radio. A terrible crash. He's fallen onto the floor. Grandmother screams.It's a stroke.Turn off the radio. Call the neighbours.I'm alonein the dark. Crying, crying. 'Want to haveone last look at him?'There's a newspaperover his head, to keepoflthe flies.There's a newspaperover thejam Grandmother'sj ust made - to keepoffthe flies. A dead body on top ofthe cupboard where rhe pots ofjam are kept. I gave them a poem to put in his cofhn. 'What rhymes with bonheur?'He had answered,'Instead otfeuille moile,you can just put lesfailles semeurent','But you can't sav that, Grandpa.' 'You can if I say so!' I would have to ask someoneelse.I loved him a lot, but he might not know somerhinglike that. He'd beena worker. An amazing man. A striker. They'd gone on strike at ,, N{onceau-les-Mines.There'd been fighting. Some peoplewere killed. I
Contemplatingsuicide.A phobic object. Dying to exorcisedeath. Corpse, Body, Flesh convulsed to put an end to finitude. Death in the hollow ofyour hand, a finger on the trigger - to trigger offa lot more chaos,for all the others, too. Putting the lid down. Pulling the chain. Willing impotence. One bullet into the mouth, another into rhe heart.Just a vear belore his brotherhe blew his brainsout. A shotgun.Po.intblank. I couldn't understand it. I lought it without understanding. His way of saying fuck everything. I lelt only rage.As if he'd shot me. Naive policemenon bicycles.Blond hair. Outside rhe metro at two a.m. Come and see me again when you can pay me, little boy, when you've established1'ourselfin some way. This wasn't really her scene. Maybe she had nothing to do with that kind of scene. Aimed at the black, killed the white. Frankly now, do vou really think I'm going to be all right? I'm amazed by your naive optimism. I do feel a lot better,it's true. But that'sjust what worriesme, becauservhateverhappens, it's too late. I'm too old. I can't start againat the beginning.The hopeyou rry to give me only makes me feel anxiety. Are you reaily taking in what I'm
I
Sepulchrefor an Oedipus Complex
saying?Or is it your prolessionalduty to pretendnot to believeme?You know - I've {inallyworked out how to do it.Just thinking of it makesme happy. But I'll haveto rvait a while, it can only be donein the spring.It'll be lovely,you'll see. Falling asleepon the beachwhen the tide is comingin -just taking a lew tabletsfirst -just too many, so as to let oneselfbe carriedout without a fight. I feel secretlyclose to all the other people who don't want death to be something that comes lrom outside themselves.Practising mourning for themselveslike a pianist practisinghis scales.Death to ward offsomething worse?A death with which we come to feel completelyat home?But there's anotherdeathofwhich one can say nothing,which hasno pointsofreference, rvhich alienateseverything. Two rationales of suicide: the paranoid-familial of Werther, and the schizo-incest of Kleist. On the one hand, death is human and meaningful: Mama, you understand, I couldn't go on, Yes son, I understand, Yes General, I understand, everyoneunderstands,death is quick, deathis pathetic.On the other,deathis proud, thereis a contemplative driliing (if that is what it is) towards infinitv, dissolutionthrough inadvertence. The significant image, to be convincing, to stage the death scene,dries its tears- the plav-actingis over! I t snatchesat the figureofdeath,the death that is a desireturned upsidedown. At first it may have beenjust a game,a dizzv spin - come on, scareme! But it getscaught up in the n-rovingchain, and is broken and shattered.The imagined death then opens onto a completely de-territorializeddesire.With everybreakanotherrebeldeath.Are you going to get rid of your Oedipus for good?Since I'm in it up to the neck, let me presentmyself for the holocaust.Deciding the undecidable.Join 'society's suicides'.Stop going along r,r'iththe systemat the very moment when it has becomeintole rablepoliticalj. Death - to cut offthe last possibleline of retrear. ,-lndto spit in society'sey--e, with all its con-tricksabout lile as a preparationlor death, and its social servicesto make life tolerableon the seamy side, its Eros-Thanatos cocktails.There is the last reflectionon the frosted pictures of expectation, the agonizing wrench, and at last death - the diamond of unnamabledesire.
Institutional Psychotherapy
Transversality'
Institutional therapeutics is a delicate infant. Its development needs close watching, and it tends to keep very bad company. In fact, the threat to its life comesnot from any congenital debility, but from the factionsofail kinds that are lying in wait to rob it of its specific object. Psychologists,psychosociologists,even psychoanalysts,are ready to take over bits ofit that they claim to be their province, while voraciousgovernmentslook for their chance 'incorporate' it in their olficial texts. How many of the hopeful offspring of to avant-gardepsychiatry have beenthus kidnapped early in life since the end of the last war - ergo-therapy,social therapy, community psychiatry and so on. Let me begin by saying that institutional therapeuticstrcsgotan object, and that it must be defendedagainst everyonewho wants to make it deviate from it; it must not let itself become divorced from the reality of the social problematic. This demands both a new awarenessat the widest possible sociallevel - for instance the national approach to mental health in France 'and a definite theoretical stance in relation to existing therapeutics at the most technical levels. In a sense it may be said that the absence of any common approach in the present-day psychiatric movement reflects the segregationthat persistsin various forms between the world of the mad and the rest of society. Psychiatrists who run mental institutions suffer from a disjunction between their concern for those in their care and more general social problems that shows itself in vaious ways: a systematic failure to understand what is going on outside the hospital walls, a tendency to psychologizesocial problems, certain blind spots about work and aims insila the institution and so on. Yet the problem ofthe e{Iectofthe socialsignifier on the individual lacesus at every moment and at every level, and in the context of institutional therapeuticsone cannot help coming up against it all the time. The social relationship is not something apart from individual and family problems; on the contrary: we are forced to recognize it in every case of psycho-pathology,and in my view it is even more important when one is dealing with those psychotic syndromesthat present the most'de-socialized' appearance. heldin Parisin l. A reportpresented to the 6rst International Psycho-Drama Congress, September I964. Published inthe Rcau dcpslcholhircpieiwtilulilalle,no.
r,
t2
Institutional PsychotheraPY
Freud, rvhosewor.kmainly developedaround the problemof the neuroses, was well aware oi'this problem, as 1!,ecan see,for instance,from the following: lor a moment,we can savthar in {bcta of clanger Ilwe dwellon thesesituations to everyageof is a)lotted ofdanger) ofanxiety(thatis.situation dererminarrt particular fitsthe helplessness ro it. The dangerofpsychical as beingappropriate development stugeoitheego'sea.lyimmaturity;thedangeroflossofanobject(orlossoflove)fitsthe fits thedangerofbeingcastrated in thefirstyearsofchildliood; laci ofself-sufficiency' position, a special whichassumes thephallicphase;anclfinalll,fearofthe super-ego, ofanxiety theolddeterminants ofdevelopment fitsiheperiodoflaten...In thecourse to themha'e losttheir ofdangercorresponding sincethesituarions shouidLedropped, of the ego But thisonlyoccursmostincomo*ing to the strengthening importance thefearoflossoflove:thevneverbecome peopleareunableto surmount pletely.Nlan,v and in this respectcarrv on their lo'e people's other of tnjependent .rffici.ntl1, l e v c cr e a s es.i n c ei .n r h e h e l r , r . i o uarsi n f a n r sF. c a ro f t h es u p e r - e gs oh o u l dn o r m a l l n andonlvin therarestcases in socialrelations, it isindispensable lormofrnoralanxiety, ol A fewoftheold situations ofhumansociety. independent become canan indir.idual ntudificabv makinc( unlemporalr' in survivingintolaterperiods danger,too.succeed , 1 u , 1i n51 [ e i rd e t e r m i n a not fsa n x i e t' r 'old determinantsof anxiety'comeup against \\'hat is the obstaclethat the this !\'henceIhis persistence. zrnclrhar pfevenrtheir altogetherdisappearing? are thenl produced that the situations once Past, anxieties sur\rivalofneurotic and in the absenceolany'situation ofdanger'? A feu'pagesearlier, Freud reamnns that anxiet)' precedesrepression:the anxiety is caused by ztn exrernaldanger, it is real;but that external danger is actuallv evoked and 'It is true that the boy felt determined by the irrstinctualinternal danger: anxietyin the laceof a demand by his libido in this instanceanxietyat being in love with his mother.'3Thus it is the internal danger that lays the ground {br rhe exreqral. In ternls ofreality, the renulciation olthe beloi'edobject of the lossof the member,but the'castratiou correlateswith the alcceptance complex'itself cannot be got rid of by such a renunciation.For in eflecti! i.npfiesthe introductionofan additionalterm in the situationaltriangulation of ihe Oe,lipuscomplex,so that therecan be no end to the threat of casttation 'unconsciousneedlor w,hichwill continuallv reactivatewhat Freud calls the had remained position whose punisl.rme't,.aCastration and punishment, the choiceof governing of ambivalence' the'principle p.ecariou. becauseof the uariousparr objecrs,are thus irreversiblycaught up rn the working ofthe social signifiers.Henceforth, the authority of this socialrealit2will base its survivai on the establishmentof an irrational morality in rvhich punishment Pclican editiotr' t913, Pp z . N c i t I n t r o t l u c t o r yL f t t u T e s D n P s t ' c h a o n o b s i st ,r a n s . . J a m e s S t r a c h t r ' . l ?o-2 L, 3 . r D r d . ,P . I t 6 . 4.ibid.,p.t4t.
Transversality
r3
will be justified simply by a la'"vof blind repetition, since it cannot be explained by any ethical legality. It is nor therelore any use trying to recognizethis persistenceof anxiety beyond actual lsituationsof danger' throughsorneimpossibledialoguebetweenthe ego ideal a.d the super-ego; what it in lac meansis that those'situarionsof danger' belongto thespecific 'signifying logic' of this particular social framework, which will have to be analysed with the same maieutic rigour as is brought to bear in the psychoanalysis of the individual. The persistence is really a repetirion,the expressionofa death instinct.By seeingit merely as a continuity, we miss the questionimplied in it. It seems natural to prolong the resolutionof the oedipus complexinto a'successful' integrationinto societv.But surel,vit would be more to the point to seethat the way anxietv persistsmust be linked with the dependence of the individual on the collectivitydescribedby Freud. The fact is that, barring some total changein the socialorder, the castrationcomplexcan neverbe satisfactorily resolved,since contemporary sociery persistsin giving it an unconscious lunction of social regulation.There becomesa more and more pronounced incompatibilitybetweenthe function of the father, as rhe basisof a possible solutionlor the individual of the problemsof identificarioninherent in the structureof the conjugal familv, and the demandsof indusrial societies,in w-hichan inregratingmodel of the lather/king/godpattern tends ro loseany efrecti'eness outsidethe sphereof mystification.This is especiallyevidentin phasesof social regression,as for instancewhen lascist,d.ictatorialresimesor regimesof personal,presidentialpower give rise to imaginary phenomenaof collectivepseudo-phallicizationthat end in a ridiculous totemizarion bv popularvote of a leader:the leaderactually remainsessentiallywithout anv real control over the signifyingmachine of the economicsy-stem, which sdll continuesto reirforce rhe pou'er and autonomy of its functioning. The Kennedysand Khrushchevswho tried to evade this law were 'sacrificed'though by different rituals - the one on rhe altar ol the oil companies,rhe otherson that olthe baronsofheavv industrv. The real subjectivity in modern Stares,rhe real powers of decisionrvhateverthe old-fashioneddreams of the bearersof 'narional legitimacy'cannot be identified with any individual or u,ith rhe existenceof any small groupofenlightenedleaders.It is still unconsciousand blind, anclthereis no hope that anv modern oedipus will guide its steps.The sorutioncertainly does not lie in summoning up or trying to rehabilitate ancestraiforms, preciselvbecausethe Freudianexperiencehas taught us to seethe problem of, on the one har"rd,the persistenceofanxiety beyond changesin the situation that producedir, and on the other, the limits thar can be assignedto this process. This is whereinstitutionaltherapeuticscomesin: its objeit is ro rry ro changethe data acceptedby the super-egointo a new kind ofacceptanceof
t+
Institutional Ps1'chotheraPy
,initiative" renderingpointlessthe blind socialdemand1bra particular kind ofcastratingprocedureto the exclusionofanvthing else' a certaln What t am'no1t'pr6posingis only a tem'porarymeasure'There are ln an stages diflbrent malk number oftbrmulationsthat I havefound usefulto of grid of kind a out set to it sensible institutional experiment. i think among ideas and meanings of meandering the correspondencebetween of grora'ingdispsvchotics,especiallyschizophrenics'and the mechanrsms cordanceberngsetupatalllevelso|industrialsocietyinitsneo-capita]istand have to identify bureaucraricsocialistphasewhereby the individual tendsto Th-e^ consumrng-machines-consuming-producing-machines' of rn,ithan icleal ofthat ideal. If silenceofthe catatonicis plrhaps a pioneeringinterpretation spokenword' the group is going to structureiiselfin termsola rejectionofthe societybe olthat area an Hou'can sile.ce? from r"sponrc is there apart ",1',a-i spoken the reducing of the process in dent a small make even as to altereclso ol' groups between u,ord to a rvritten system?we must, I think, distiuguish that oi'groups descriptions formal of two kinds. one must be extremeiywary we are dealing clefinethem apart from r,t'hatthey are aiming to do Tlie groups and are u,ith in institutional therapeuticsare involved in a definiteactivitv, into research as is known totallv di{Ierentlrom thoseusuallyinvolvedin what or some sense in and institution' an to group dvnarnics.They are attached to do' ajob wolld, the on vie*'point a perspective, other thev have a as we go This first distinction, though it mav prove difficult to sustain and gloups independent further. can be summarizedas being one between endeavours a'vocation" with group or clependentgroups The subjectgroup, this casecan to coirrrol it. or"n behaviour and elucidateits object, and in could say of this type of group produceits own tools olelucidation. schotre'1 systemof that it hearsand is heard,and that it can thereforework out its own its own beyond a rt'orld to open become so hierarchizing structuresand getting things of capable not is group The dependent iirterests. imrneciiatc is subjectto its into this sort ofperspective;the way it hierarchizesstrr,rctures it makesa that group subject the adaptationto oih.. groups.One can say of but heard', is cause that'its group onl,v dependent statement- u'hereasof the when' or lvhom, by or where knows no one kind This clistinctionis not absolute;it is simply a first atremptto index the poles ofreference' like two ofgroup we are dealingrvith. In fact it operates to oscillate sin"cee*,.ry group, bui especially every subject group, tends and a speak, is to r.t'ork whose a subjectivity of that positions: betu.eentwo reference This subjectivityruhi.h i. lost ro view in the othernessofsocietv. o| role. p.o-,,i.]., us with a sa|eguard against |alling into the |ormalism by the played part ofthe problem the consider usio analvsis;it also leads 'Le Translert dit fondamental de Freud pour poser le problime; psychanalyseet 5. J. Schotre, no r' ittslitutionelLe, institution', Reuuedeltslchothitaqie
Transversality l5 individual in the group as a being with the power of speech, and thus to re-examinethe usual mechanism of psycho-sociological and structuralist descriptions'It is also, undoubtedly,a rvay ofgettingback to the theories of ,training bureaucracy,self-nranagement, grorpr'und ,o on, r.vhichregularly lail in their object becauseof their scientistic.efu.al to involve meaniirsand c o n t e nt . I think it convenientfurther to distinguish,in groups,berween the .manilest content' - that is, what is said and done, rhe atrirudesof the difrerenr members, the schisms, the appearanceof leaders, of aspiri'g leaders, scapegoats and so on - and the 'latent content',which can be discoieredonlv by interpreting the various escapesofmeaning in the order ofphenomena. w e m a y d e f i n et h i s l a t e n t c o n t e n ra s ' g r o u p d e s i r e ' :i t m u s t b e articurated with the group'sspecificlorm of love and death instincts. Freud said rhat in serious neurosesthere was a disrocation of the fundamentalinstincts;the probrem facing the analystwas ro relncegrate them in sucha way as to dispel,say,the sympromsof sado-masochism. io undertake suchan operation,the very structureofinstitutionswhoseonly existenceas a body is imaginary requires the setting-up or institutional means for the purpose- though it must not be forgottenthat thesecannor claim to be more than svmbolic mediationstending by their very nature to be broken down into some kind of meaning. It is not the same as what happens in the psychoa'al'1ictransference. The phenomenaof imaginari,porr.rrionure not graspedand articularedon the basisofan anarvsr'sinterpreiation. The group phantasyis essentiallysymbolic,whateverimagerymay te dra*n utong"uyri. Its inertia is regulated onry by an endressreturn to rhe same inJolubr" problems.Experienceof institutional therapeuticsmakes it clear that indi'idual phantasizingne'er respectsthe particular nature of this svmbolic planeofgroup phantasy.on rhe conrrary)it tries to absorbit. and to'overla1. it with particular imaginingsrhar are 'naturaily' to be found in the various roles that could be srructured by using the signifiers circurated by the collective. This 'imaginarf incarnation'ofsomeof the signifyingarticulations ofthe group - on the pretextoforganization,e{ficiency,presrlse, or, equally, ofincapacity,non-qualification,erc. - crystailizesth..iru.tu-." ur'u *toti, hindersits possibilitiesfor change,determinesits featuresand irs ,mass,,and restrictsro the urmost its possibiritiesror dialoguewith anything that might tend to bring its 'rulesof the game, into question:in short,it proiuces ull ih. conditionsfor degeneratinginto what we have calleda clependent group. The unconsciousdesire ol a group, lor jnstance the ,pi.lot, gioup in a traditionalhospital,as expressionof a death insti,cr, wili probJly not ue suchas can be statedin words, and will producea whole.ung. of ,y*pto_.. Thoughthosesymptomsmay in a sensebe ,articulatedlike I language, and describable-ina structurar context, to the extent that thev tend to d"iseiisethe
r6
Institutionai Psvchotherapv
institution ;rs subject thev will ne,,,ersucceedin expressingthemselves otherrvisethan ir-iincohelenttermsfrom which onewill still be left to decipher the object(totem and raboo)erectedat the very point at which the emergence of real speechin rhe group becomesan impossibility.The bringing to light of this point, at which desireis reducedto showingonly the tip of a (false)nose, cannotgive accessto clesireitselfsincethat $'ill remain,as such,ttnconscious as the neurotic intends, relusing completelyto let itself be demolishedby exhaustiveexplanations.But clearinga space)keepingroom for a first piane of referencelor this group desireto be identified,will immediatelyplace the whole statementof the problem be,vondchancerelationships,will throw an entirely new light on'problems of organization" and to that extent obscure attemptsat formal anclapparentlyrational description.In other rvords,it is t h e t r i a l r u t t f o r a n y a t t e m p ta t g r o u Pa n a l v s i s , In such irn attempt, a lirndamenraldistinctionrvill emergeirom the very beginningbetweencuring the alienationof the group 2p6[snzlysingit, The lunction of u group analysisis not the sameas that of settingup a community Let orientation,or group-engineering. with a more oi lesspsycho-sociological me repeat: group anal.vsisis both more and less than role-adaptation, transmitting inlormarion and so on. The kev questionshave been asked beibre iikes and dislikeshave har.dened,beforesub-groupshave formed, at the ievel lrom rvhich the group's potential creativity springs though ol rejection generallv all creativity is strangled at birth by its complete its clich6s about mouthing its time spend to ionr.,.,r.. the group preferring ,rermsof r.eference" and thus closingolrthe possibilityofeversat'inganvthing real, that is, anything that could have any connectionwith other strandsof human discourse,historical,scientific,aestheticor whatever' Take the caseof a political group'condemned by history': r+'hatsort of desirecould it live by orher rhan one forever turning in upon itself?It will have incessantlvto be producing mechanismsof defence,o{' denial, of group phantasies,m1,ths,dogmasand soon. Analvsisof thesecan repr.ession, only leacito discooeringthat they expressrhe natureofthe group'sdeathwish in its relation to the buried and emasculatedhistoric instinctsof enslaved masses)classesor nationalities.It seemsto me lhat this last aspectof the ,highestleyel,ofanah,siscannot be separatedfronr the other psychoanalytic problemsof the group, or indeedof individuals. In rhe traditional psychiatric hospital, for example, there is a dominant group consistingofthe director, the financial administrator, the doctors and Iheir vuives,etc.,who lorm a solid structurethat blocksanVexpressionofthe clesireof the groups of human beingsof which the institution is composed. \dhat happeni ro rhar desire?One looksfirst at the symptomsto be seenat the levelofvaiious sub-groups,which carry the classicsocialblemishes,beingset but alsoat other signsin their ways, disturbance,all forms of divisiveness,
Transversality | 7 alcohoiismamong one lot ofnurses perhaps,or the generallyunintelligent behaviourofanother (for it is quite true, as Lacan pointsout, that stupidity is anotherway of expressingviolent emotion). It is surely a kind olrespectfor the m),steryembodiedin neurosesand psychoses that makesthoseattendants in our moderngra,,eyard degradethemsell'esand thus pay negativehomage to the messageof thosewhom the entireorganizationof our societyis geared to disregarding.Not everyonecan a{Iord, like some psychiatrists,to take refugein the higher reachesofaestheticismand thus indicate that, as lar as theyare concerned,it is not life'smajor questionsrhat they aredealingwith in their hospitalwork. . Group analysiswill not makeit its aim to elucidatea statictruth underlying this symptomatology,but rather to create the conditions lavourable to a particular mode of interpretation, identical, lollowing Schotte's view, to a transference. Translerenceand inter.pretationrepresenta symbolicmode ol intervention,but u,emust rementberthat they are not somethingdone by an individual or group rhat adopts the role of'analvst, lor the purpose.The interpretationmav rvellbe given by the idiot of the ward if he is able to make his voiceheardat the right time, the time rvhena parricularsignifierbecomes activeat the levelofthe structureas a rvhole,lor instancein organizinga game of hop-scotch.One has to meet interpretarionhalf-way.One must therefore - psychological,sociological,pedagogicalor rid oneselfofallpreconceptions even therapeutic.In as much as the psychiatristor nurse wields a certain amountofpower, he or she must be consideredresponsiblelor destroyingthe possibilities ofexpressionofthe institution'sunconscioussubjecti'ity.A fixed transference, a rigid mechanism,Iike the relationshipof nursesand patients with the doctor, an obligatory, predetermined,'territorialized,transference onto a particularrole or stereotype,is worsethan a resistanceto analysis:it is a wav of interiorizing bourgeoisrepressionby the repetitive,archaic and artificialre-emergence ol the phenomenaof caste,w,ith all the spellbinding and reactionarygroup phantasiesthey bring in their train. As a temporarysupport set up to preserve,at leastfor a time, the objectof our practice,I propose to replacethe ambiguous idea of the institutional transferencewith a new concept: transaersalitl,t in the group. The idea of transversality is opposedto: (a) verticality,as describedin the organogrammeof a pyramidal structure (leaders,assistants, etc.); (b) horizontality,as it existsin the disturbedwards ofa hospital,or) even more,in the senilewards; in other words a stateof afrairsin which thinss and peoplefit in as bestthel,can with the situationin which they find themselves. Think of a field with a lence around it in rvhich there are horseswith adjustableblinkers: the adjustment of their blinkers is the 'coefEcientof transversality'. Ifthey are so adjustedas to makethe horsestotally blind. then
rB
Institutional PsYchotheraPY
will takeplace'Graduallv, presumablva certain traumaticlorm of eucor:nter about more easily' Let moving them envisage as the flaps'areopened,one can terms of affectivitv' in one.another to relate people how us try to inragine porcupines' no one can A.cor.li.,g to Schopenhauer'slamous parable of the stand being too closeto his fellow-men: to protectthemhuddledtogetlrer One lreezingwinterday, a herdofporcupines pricked eachother their spines But warmth combinid theil by coid s"lue,ugoin.tihe thev howeler, conrinued, cold the since ,o puint"rttuthat thevsoonclrewapartagain. prickingpainful'This lound the they more onie and more, once together haclto drarv just the right alternatemovingtogetherand apart went on until thev discovered o evils both from thenr preserve distanceto of degreeof blindne-ss In a hospital,the'coeticient of transversality'isthe the that suggest each of the people present. However, I would ^official that resultsfrom it' acl.iustingofail the blinkers, a'd the overt communication the level of the medicai clependsalmost automaticallyon rr'hat happens^at administratorand the financial sr"rperintendent, nursing superintendent,the There may' of base' so on. Hence all mo'emeni is lrom the summit to the 'pressurelrom the base', but it never usually managesto course,be some must make any changein the overallsiructureof blindness.An1'modification role, and a. reperson's each ol redefinition structural of a be in tcrrns people remain fixated on orientation of the whole institution' So long as themselves' !hemselves,they neverseeanything of Transversaliiy is a dimension that"' tries to overcome both the impasse pureVelticalityandthato|merehorizontality:ittendstobeachier'edwhen and, aboveail, in there is rnaximum communicationamong differentlevels working towards' is group independent an different meanings. it is this that Myhypotl.,esisisthis:itispossibletochangethevariouscoe{ficientsofunFor example, .or..iou, transversalityat ihe variousie'els of an institution. consisting of circle the within place the overr communicarion that takes on an exremain may house'doctors the and the medical superintendent is transversality of coefncient its that appear it may ancl ievel, tremely lormal ue.ylo*.ontheotherhandthelatentandrepressedcoefficientexistingat nurses have more department level may be found to be much higher: the genuinerelationshipsamongthemselves,.invirtueofra'hichthepatientscan - and remember this irake transferencesthat havi a therapeutic effect' Now though o| is still hypothetical- the multiple coefhcientsof transversa]it,v, transversality of level fact, the In differing intensity, remain homogeneous' determines how .*iuting"in the group that has the real power unconsciously are regulated' of transversality levels other of the exiensive fou.iUiti,i.r - there were a strong coefficient of unusual be would it though Suppose 6. ParergaundParalipornna,Partl I,'Gleichnisse und Parabeln''
Transversality
rg
tra.nsversality among the house-doctors:since thev generallyhave no real powerin the running of the institution, that,strongcoefEcientwould remain latent,and would be lelt only in a very small area. If I may be permitted to apply an analogv lrom thermo-dvnamicsto a spherein which matters are determinedbv sociallinesofforce,I would say thar the excessive insrirurional entropy of this stare of transversalityresults in the absorption of any inclinationto lessenit. But do not forget that the fact that we are convinced that one or severalgroups hold the key to regulatingthe latent transversality of the institution as a whole doesnot mean that we can identify the group or groupsconcerned.They,arenot necessarily the sameasthe o{icial authorities of the establishmentwho control onlf its ofEcialexpression.It is essentialto distinguishthe real power from the manifestpower. The real relationshipof lorceshas to be analysed.Everyoneknows that the law ofthe State is not made by the ministries; similarly, in a psychiatric hospital, defactopower mav elude the o{Ecial representativesof the law and be shared among various sub-groups- the ward. the specialistdepartment, even the hospital social clubor the stallassociation.It seemseminentlydesirablethat the doctorsand nurseswho are supposedto be responsiblefor caring for the patientsshould securecollectivecontrol over the managementof thosethings beyond rules and regulationsthat determinethe atmosphere,the relationships,everything that really makesthe institution tick. But you cannorachievethis merely by declaringa reform; the best intentions in the world are no guaranteeof actuallygettingto this dimensionof transversalitv, If the declaredintention of the doctors and nursesis to have an ellect beyondmerely that of a disclaimer,their entireselvesas desiringbeingsmust be involvedand brought into questionby the signifyingsrrucrurethey face. This could lead to a decisivere-examinationof a whole seriesof supposedly establishedtrurhsi why does the State rvithhold grants?Why does Social Securitypersistentlyrefusero recognizegroup rherapy?Though essenrially liberal, surelv medicine is reactionary when it comesto matters of classification and hierarchy- as indeed are our trade-unionfederations,though they are in theory more {o the left. In an institution, the effective, that is unconscious,source of power, the holder of the real power, is neither permanentnor obvious. It has to be flushedout, so to say, by an analytic searchthat at times invol'es huge detoursby way ofthe crucial problenrsof our time. If the analysisof an institution consisrsin endeavouringto make ir aware that it shouldgain control ofwhat is being said, any possibilityofcreative inten'entionwill dependon its initiatorsbeingable ro existat the point where 'it shouldhavebeenable to speak'so as to be imprinted by the signifierof the group - in other words to accept a form of casrrarion.This wound, this barrier,this obliterationoftheir powersofimagination leadsback,ofcourse,
20
Institutional PsYchotheraPY
to underlie any to an analysis of the objects discovered.bv.Freudianism laeces'pents breast' subject: the bl' order p"*iUi. ^r.".ption of the svmbolic detachable;but it alsoleads and so on, all ofrvhich are at leastin phantasy to the oi'the role of all ihe transitionalobjectsTrelated back to an anal_vsis living worth life makes that all *^rftl.g machine, the television,in short picture the with starting objects' part these ,oauy.furrf,..more' the sum ofall is itselfthrown daily onto the of the body as the basistbr sell--identification' Exchangethat dealswith shares market asibclder,alongsidethe hiddenStock all the rest lndustrial society and sport aestheticism, in pseudo-eroticism, its need- satisfvinglrom the by fate ofour control Lincollsclous thus secut'es in death instinct to disjoint ever'vconsumer/producer foinr oi ui.t of the great a becoming itself find would ,u.h u *'u1' that ultimatel,vhumanity God of the Econornyshall lragmented body held togeti.reronly as the.suPreme 'the order of to fit into symptom a social force ro pointl't's decree.It is, then, basis; it ivould be like taking an ;hd;', Ibt it.,ut i. in the last resort its only timesa day and shuttinghim u.l hundred oUr..rionutrvhowasheshis handsa his svmptomatologyonto pantc displace would he in a rootn without a sink and unbearableattacksofanxietl" will it be possiUteOnly i{'there ts a certain deg'ee '->fttansversalitv 1t119tt re-thinking- to set golng continual to o,liy to. a titne, sinceall this is subject as a group of using the real un u,-tutyti.processgiving individuals a .hope and group the both u'ill manifest mirror. When that huppei', the individual to revealed will be he chain' himsel{.If the group hejoins actsas a signifying other the on lf' dilemmas neurotic himselfas he is bevondhi' i*ugi'.'u'l'and alienated'caughtup in its f-,".a, fr. happenstojoin u g,n,i that is profoundlv his narcissismreinlorced will have own distorted imagery, tit ntu'otit silently devoting continue can L.1'onOhis wildest hopes,while the psychotic h i m s e l f t o h i s s u b l i m e u ' ' i u " " u l p u t ' i o n ' ' T h e a l t e r n a t i v e t o a n i n t e join rvention the that an individual would ;i ;;; il"p-"nalvtic kind is the possibility group's the to access thus gain g.oup-u. both listener and speaker' and i n w a r d n e s as n d i n t e r P r e t t ' Ifacertaindegreeoftransversalitybecomessolidlvestab]ishedinan in-thegroup: the delusionsand institution,a new kind ofdialogue ca"tegin patient maniGstationswhich havehithertokept the all the other unconscrous inakindofsolitaryconfinementcanachieveacollectivemodeo|expresston. Themodificationo|theSuper.egothatlspokeofearlieroccursatthemoment to emerge where social rea<1'v when a particular model of lunguugt'is a ritual' To consider the as structures have been hitherto functioning only is to posethe problem of process a in such oossibilitv oftherapists intervening to someextent a radical presuppose in turn' would, ;;;;t;;;;;tit.r'Ji.rt than it is given by Winnicott 7. I use this term in a more general sense
Transversality 2r translormationin the presentpsychoanalyticmovement- which has certainl"'not up to now been much interestedin re-centringits activity on real patientswhere they actually are, that is. lor the most part, in the sphereof hospitaland communitv psychiatry. The social statr:s of medical superintendentis the basis of a phantasv alienation,settinghim up as a distantpersonage.How couldsucha personbe persuadedeven to accept, let alone be eager, to have his every move questioned,without retreating in panic? The doctor who abandons his phantasystatusin order to place his role on a svmbolicplane is, on the other hand,well placedto effectthe necessarysplitting-upof the medicalfunction into a number of different responsibilitiesinvolving variouskinds of gror"rps 'totemization' and individuals,The object of that function movesawav lrom andis transferredto diflerentkinds ofinsritutions,extensions and delegations ofpower.The very lact that the doctor could adopt sucha splitting-upwould thus representthe first phaseolsetting up a structureoftransversality.His 'articulated role,now like a language',rvouldbe involvedwith the sum of the grouprsphantasiesand signifiers.Rather than eachindividual acting out the 's comedyof life for his own and other people benefit in line with the reification of the group, transr,ersalityappearsinevitably to demand the imprinting of eachrole. Once firmly establishedby a group wielding a significantshareof Iegalandrealpower, this principleofquestioningand re-definingrolesis very likely,ifapplied in an analytic context,to have repercussions at every other levelas well. Such a modificationo[ego idealsalso modifiesthe introjectsol the super-ego,and makes it possibleto set in motion a tvpe of castration complexrelated to different socialdemandsfrom thosepatientspreviously experienced in their familial, professionaland other relationships.To accept 'put being on trial', being verbally laid bare b.v others, a certain type of reciprocalchallenge,and humour, the abolition ofhierarchicalprivilegeand soon- all this will tend to createa new group law whose'initiating' eflectswill bring to light, or at leastinto the halllight, a number of signsthat actualize transcendental aspectsofmadnesshithertorepressed.Phantasies ofdeath, or ofbodily destruction,so important in psychoses, can be re-experienced in the rvarmatmospherecfa group, eventhough one might have thought their late wasessentiallyto remain in the controiof a neo-societywhosemissionwas to exorcisethem. This said, however,one must not lose sight of the lact that, even when pavedrvith the bestintentions,the therapeuticendeavouris still constantlyin danger of foundering in the besotting mythology of 'togetherness'.But showsthat the bestsafeguardagainstthat dangeris to bring to the experience surfacethe group's instinctual demands. These force everyone,whether patient or doctor, to consider the problem of their being and destiny. The groupthen becomesambiguous.At one level,it is reassuringand protective,
't"trr-rl,.a
2'2 Institutional Psychotherapv and a del-ences screeningall accessto ranscendence,generatingobsessional mode of alienationone cannot heip finding comforting,lending eternity at the interest.But at the other, there appearsbehind this artificialreassurance most detailedpicture of human finitude,in which everyundertakingof mine is taken from me in the name of a demand more implacablethan mv own death - that ol being car,rghtup in the existenceof that other, who alone suaranteeswhat reachesme via human speech.Unlike rvhat happens in to the master/ individual anal.vsis, there is no longeranv imaginary rel'erence to me to representa possiblewav of slaverelationship.and it thereforeseelns overcomingthe castrationcomplex. * Transversalityin the group is a dimensionoppositeand complementaryto the sructures that generatepvramidai hierarchizationand sterile ways of transrnittingmessages. Transversality is the unconscioussource of action in the group, going beyondthe objectivelaws on which it is based,calrying the group'sdesire. This dirnensioncan only be seenclearlv in certain groups rvhich, intentry to acceptthe meanirtgof their praxis,and establish tionally or otheru.,ise, themselvesas subject groups - thus putting themselvesin the position ol having to bring about their orvn death, By contrast,dependentgroupsare determinedpassivelylrom outside,and magically protect themwith the help of mechanismsof self-preservation, selvesfrom a non-senseexperiencedas external. In so doing, the! are re.jectingall possibilitl' of the dialecticalenrichment that arisesfrom the group'sotherness. A group analysis,setlingout to reorganizethe structuresoftransversality, seemsa possibility- providing it avoidsboth the trap ofthosepsychologizing descriptionsol its own internal reiationshipswhich result in losing the phantasmicdimensionspeculiarto the group, and that of compartmentalization which purposelykeepsit on the levelofa dependentgroup. The effectofthe group's signifieron the subiectis felt, on the part ofthe 'threshold' of castration,for at each phase of its latter, at the level ol a symbolic historv, the group has its own demand to make on the individual subjects,involving a relativeabandonmentoftheir instinctualureingsto'be partofa group'. There may or may not be a compatibility betweenthis desire,this group Eros, and the practicalpossibilitiesfor eachpersonofsupportingsuch a trial - a trial that rnay be experiencedin different wavs, from a senseofrejection or even of mutilation, to creativeacceptancethat could lead to a permanent c h a n g ei n t h e p e r s o n a l i t r . This imprinting bv the group is not a one-\4a)'affair:it givessomerights, some authority to the individuals a{Iected.But, on the other hand, it can
:1n'l3
.:::
Transversalit,v 2g prodr'rcealterations in the group's level of tolera'ce towards individual dive.gences, and result in crisesover lnystifiedissuesthat will endanger the group'sfuture. The role olgroup analystis to revealthe existenceofsuch situations and to . leadthe group as a whoie to be lessready to evadethe lessonsthey teach. It is rny hvpothesisthat thereis nothing inevitableabout the bureaucratic self-mutilationof a subject groupJor its unconsciousresort to mechanisrns that milirareagainstits potentiarrransversaliry. They depend,rrom the first moment,on an acceptanceof the risk _ which accompanies the emergenceof any phe'omenonofrear meaning- ofhaving to conrronti.rutionutity] aeuii, and the othernessofthe other.
The Group and the person 25
The Group and the Personr
A fragmented balance.sheet To lollo'v so many other speakerson the themeof society,the responsibilitv of i n d i v i d u a l s ,m i l i t a n t s ,g r o u p sa n d s . o n , c r e a r e sa c e r t a i ni n h i b i t i o n . It is a minefield. with questionershidden in fortifieddug-outswairing to atrack r.,ou: what right has he to speak?what businessis it olhis? rvhat is.-he getting at? And professionalacademicsare there too, to recall ,,o, to n.,oJ.rtr,,.1nd systematicall,v to restrict a'v approach to theseproblems that is remorely ambitious. N o t e v e na m b i t i o u s n, e c e s s a r i l b v ,u t r e r a t e dt o r e s p o n s i b i l i t yF.o r e x a m p r e . we ma,vstudy this or that text of \{arx or Freud, we mav studl it rn depth, seeingit in the cortext ofthe generaltrendsolthe period; but very leru people will agree to pursue that study into its bearing on the present day, on its inrplicarion.s for. sav, rhe de','elopment of iinperlrism and rhe Third r\,orld, or a particular current schoolofthousht. In diflerentplacesand dilrerentci.crn,srancesI haveput fb^vard crifrerent ideas. For ir-)stance I have spokenof the'intrr-rjects o|the super-ego,,of the capacitvofdependentgroups ro allorvthe individuar super-ego a rl.eerein. I h:rve tried to suEgestprocedureslor instit'tional analtisis.sieki'g more or lesssuccessiulll, to introduceflexibilirv.Today I $,ant to go further, but once a g a i n t h e r e i s r h i s i n h i b i t i o n .T h e b e s tw ^ y r o r a c k l e ; t i . , t t t , i n t . ro rrv ro expressmy ideasjustas they come into mv head. T'hefirst quesrionis: rvharcan ir possibrydo for 'them,?Do I reaily needto sav any more, and ro exposemvselfyet again?The peopleand groups I ha,".e know'and arsi-redrvith go about their businesswith little concern for institutional analvsis:histo'y takesits course,and all groups tend to follow th.eir,routine unti.ltheir path is divertedin somer.vayor other by an obstacle, wlretherironr wirhin or without. No, that is 'ot precisel,v true: the 'rilitant groupswith whom I am stiil in touch, institurionaltherap'groups and the groupi in the FGERI,2 have not r.Firstgivenasaralktoaworkinggroupatl_aBorde i n r 9 6 6 , a n d p u t r n r o w r t l i n g i n - { p r irl9 6 g . 2 FiddrationdesCroupesd'€tucleetdeRechercheInsrirutionelle(FcderationifInsiiruriJnal Stud1,and ResearchGroups), producing rhe retiew Rcchercfus, published in paris.
beenwithout interesrin the subject;it isjust thar they take it ror,"vhatit, on w.ho]e,is - ideas picked up here and rhere lrom Marx, Freud, Lacan, fe Trotskyisrcriricism and so on. some indeed think that quite ..rough i, alreadygoing on, and that the time spentabsorbing rhoseideascould will be usedfor thinking about somethingelse. It seemsro me, on rhecontrary.lhar if our theoriesare not properlyworked out' we are rn danger offloundering about, wasting our e{rorts'atcollective thinking, and Ietting ourse.lvesbe carried u*uy Ly psycho-sociologicaily inspired.trends ofthought or be caughrup by the demanis ofthe rrp;?_;;;. of hard-linemilitant groups. Take one hard-liner,Louis Althusser: Theproletarian revorution arsoneedsmilitantswhoarescholars (historical materialism)and phiiosophers (dialecticai materialism) to help to derenduna a.u.top it, theory . The fusionof Marxisttheorywith the workers'movement i, tt. gr.ut.rt e'entin rhewholeofhtrmanhisrory(its firsreffectbeing the socialisr revolitions). Philosophy represenrs the classstruggrein theory.The key functionof trrepraciice ot philosophy canbesumnred up in a word:tracinga lineofdemarcation between tru. andlalseideas.As Leninsaid,'The entireclasssiruggle mavar rimesbecontained in the battlelor one word rarher than another.some"-words figrrtamongthemser'es, causeof equivocation, overwhichdecisive,but undecided, barrlesare ;tffi: :::,:tt Amateurskeepoutr I stiil want to say rhingsas they comero mind without . bting on guard alr the time, but I havet..n uiu.n.d. ivi,hou, ,.utring it, ii. classstrugglelies in rrait ar every corner- especialry sinceintellectuit, iulr, whatAlthussercalrs'crassinstinct'. It seemsthat the classstruggre.un.onr. downro a collisionberweencrasses of words- the words of ,thJJass, uguin.t the wordsof the bourgeoisie.Does it realrymatrer so much what oneiuys? one Trotskyisrgroup did me the honour of devoting over half of a ,i*r..n_ pagepamphlet to a vehementdenu.nciation of my tedioustheoriesof group subjectivity,I almost collapsed under the weight of thei, u..rrurioir,-pJI bourgeois,impenitent idearist,irresponsible"elementl,your lalse theories couldmisleadgood militants.,aThey comparedme to Henri de Man, a Nazi collaboratorsentencedin his absenceto foiced rabour when the war was over. It makesyou think . . . To.return to the point. My inhibitions, as you can see)can be expressed only bv beingdressedup in externarstate-ents, and now trrat I am using quotations as weapons of debate, I will offer some more in the hope oi salvation: 3.'La Philosophiecomme arme de la rlvolution,, La pmfe, no, r 3g, April r 96g. deLa Vlrit6,.Scienceshumaines et lurte de classes,series, 4. Cahierc no. l, r965 (General Ediror: Pierre Lamberr):'lndeed the rheoriss ofr\{. cuartari and his-r.iends are rhemservesan ariena t i o n .. . ' ( p . 1 6 ) .
26
Institutional Psychotherapv
lVhelea porr'erful impetushasbeerr givento grouplormation neuroses maydiminish and at all eventstemporariiv disappear attemptshavealso fsavsFreud].Justifiable neuroses beennradeto turn thisantagonism berween andgrouplormationto therapeutic account. Eventhosewhodo notregretthedisappearance from ofreligious illusions the civilizedworld of todayu'ill admit that so longas theywerein forcethey ollered thosewho were bound by them the mostpowerfuiprotectionagainstthe dangerof Nor is it hardto discernthatall thetiesthatbindpeopleto mvstico-religious neurosis. or phiiosophico-religious sectsandcomrnunities areexpressions ofcrooked curesofali kinds of ileuroses. All of this is correlatedwith rhecontrasrbetweendirectlysexual impulsions andthosewhichareinhibitedin theiraim.s As you see.Freud did not dissociatethe problem of neurosislrom what is expressedin the term'collective grouping', For hirn there is a continuity betweenthe statesof being in love, hvpnosisand group formation. Freud might u'ell authorize me to say whatever I liked lrom a lree associationof thesethemes.But the hard-linersonceagainseizethe microphone:'That's all very well when you're talking ofneurosis or even institutional therapy, but have no right to say'u,hatever vou pleasein the highly responsiblefield of 1'r-'u the classstruggle. . .' The point upon which I ibel most uncertain,and militant groupsare most intransigent,is that of the group's subjectivity.'. . . production also is not orlly a particlllar production.Rather,it is alwavsa certainsocialbodv, a rodal :subject, whrch is active in a greater or sparser totalitv of branchesof production.'t'Oh yes, I am well aw,arethat when N{arx talks like that of a social subiect he does not mean it in the way I use it, involving a correlateof phantasizing,and a rvholeaspectofsocial creativitywhich I have soughtto sum up as'transversality'.All the same,I am glad to find in \{arx- and no longer the 'young Marx'- this re-emergence of subjectivity. !!'ell nort'. this quotations gzrtnehas repercussionson a register of the unconsciouslevel. I have only to read them out, and the spectreof guilt recedes,the statueof the Commander the victim of intemperance,all is wellI can now sav rvhateverI like on my own account.I am not going to tr.vto produce a theory basing the intrinsic interlinking ofhistorical processes on the demandsof the unconscious.To me that is too obvious to need demonstrating.The u,holelabric of m1,inmost existenceis made up of the eventsof corltemporaryhistorl'- at leastin so far as they have affectedme in various wavs. Nly phantasieshave been moulded by the'r936 complex', by that wonderful book of Trotsky's, M) Ltft,by all the extraordinaryrhetoricof the Liberation, especiallvthose of the 1,outh hostelling movementJanarchist 5 . F r e u d , G r o u p P s l c h o L o g a n d t h e A n a l 2 tshi seEo gf o( r 9 z r ) , e d . J . S r r a c h c y , i n V o l . x v i i i o f t h e C o m p l e t eW o r k s . H o g a r t h P r e s s ,t 9 5 5 . p p . 6 7 - r 4 3 . 6. Karlil1arx,/arroduclionrotheCriliqueofPoliticalEconomlli35T),publishedasrhelnrroducrionin Grundrisst(Pelican Marx Library, rg73).
The Group and the Person e7 groups, the UJRF,7 Trotskyistgroupsand the Yugoslavbrigades,and, more 'Communist menace'- the TwentiethCongressof recently, by the sag'dof the theCommunist Party of the Soviet Union, the Algerian w,ar, the War in Vietnam,the left wing of the UNEF,8 and so on and so on. Yet I also like that kind of inwardness I see in Descartes,seekingto find strengthfrom within himself, and the ultra-inward writing of people like Proustand Gide; I likeJarry, Kafka,Joyce,Beckett,Blanchotand Artaud justasin musicI like Faurd,Debussyand Ravel.Clearly, then,I am a divided man:a petty bourgeoiswho has flirted with certain elerqentsof the workers' movement, but has kept alive his subscriptionto the ideologyof the ruling class.IfAlthusser had been there, I should have had to make my choice, and I might u'ell have found myself in the serried ranks of those indispensable agentsof any social revolution - the theory-mongers.But this brings us back to squareone- the same problem has to be facedall over again. For whom do I speak?Am I really only one of those pathetic agents of the academic ideology,the bourgeois ideology, who try to build a bridge between the classes and so contribute ro integrating the working classinto the bourgeois order? Another figure to whom I owe a lot is Sartre. It is not exactly easyto admit it. I likeSartrenot so much for the consistency of his theoreticalcontribution, but the opposite- for the way he goesoffat tangents,for all his mistakesand or La Nausieto thegoodfaith in which he makes them, from Les Communistes his endeavoursto integrate Marxist d.ialecticinto the mainstream of philosophy,which has certainly lailed. I like Sartre preciselybecauseofhis failure; he seemsto me to have set himself against the contradictory demands that weretormenting him and to have remained obsessedwith them; he appearsto have resolved no problem, apart from never having been seduced by the elegance of structuralism, or the dogmatism of some of Mao Tse-tung's more distinguishedadherents. Sartre's confusions, his naiveties, his passion, all add to his value in my eyes. Which brings me back to the slippery slope: humanism,preservingour values and all that. Ofcourse,that is only as long as the individual unconsciousand history do not meet,and the topology of the Moebius strip as delineatedby Lacan is not a meansofgetting lrom one to the other. As far as I am concerned,posing the questionis something of a device, lor I am convinced - as experienceof psychosesand serious neurosesmakes absolutely clear - that, beyond the Ego, the subject is to be found scattered in fragments all over the world ol history: a patient with delusions will start talking foreign languages,will 7. UJRF: Union desJeunessesR€publicaines de France (the youth movement ofthe French C c m m u n i s tP a r t v ) . 8 . U N E F : U n i o n N a t i o n a l ed e s E t u d i a n u d e F r a n c e .
qB Institutional PsychotheraPv halllcinate history, and wars and classconflictswill becomethe meansof his/her own sell-expression. All this ma1'be true of madness'vou maY say, but histor.v,the history of socialgroups,has notl-ringto do with such madness.Here again, I show my fundamentalirresponsibility.If only I could content myself rvith itemizing the various areasofphantasy in which I can find securitylBut then I would remain condemned to going back and lorth in a dead end, and would have to admir that I have merely vielded to the external constraintsthat were part and parcel of each ef the situationsthat made me. Underlying my different options - being-lor-historv, being-for-a-particular-group' being-for-literature - is there not some searchfor an unthinking answerto what I can only call being-lor-existence,being-lor-suffering? The child, the neurotic, everv one of us, starts by being denied any true of selt fcr the individual can only speak in the context of the possessi,rn discoursecf the Other. To continue with the quotation lrom Freud I gave earlieron, bv hisorvnsymptomformations a neuroticisobligedto replace I1'heis leftto himself, He creates his own rvorldoi {iom ivhichhe is exclr-rded. the sreatgrouplormations and thus imaginationlor himself.hts orr'llreligion,his own svstemof delusions, of waywhichis clearevidence in a distorted of hr-rmanity theinstitutions recapitulates q sexualinlpulsions partplavedbv thcclirectl;' theciominating The establisheddiscourseofthe groupsofyoung peoplethat I belongedto, the establisheddiscourseof the workers'organizationsI encounteredin the filties, the philosophicaldiscourseofthe bourgeoisuniversity,literary disand its own eachhad its own consistency course,and ail the other discourses, to trv and make to it in order myself that I adapt demanded and each axioms, it m1' own. At the same time, these successiveattempts at mastering discoursesactualll, lbrmed me by lragmenting me - since that fragmentation itselfwas, on the plane of the imaginary,simply the first beginningof a more proibund reuniting. After reading a novel, I would find a whole new world openin{ trp belble me in, say,a vouth hostel,quite anotherin politicalaction and so on. My behaviourIVasthus affectedby a kind of poli morphism with more or less perverseimplications. Diflerent social bodies of relerencewere expectingme to make a decisionon one level or another. and to become establishedin someidentifiablerole - but identifiableb,vwhom?An intellectual?A militant?A prolessionalrevolutionary?Perhaps,but in the distanceI 'You are going to be a psychoanalyst.' beganto hear somethingsaying, Note. however. that these different orders must not be seen on the same ievel. A certain tvpe of group initiation has its own special imprint: real q. Freud. ()roup Ps-rchologlt and the 'lnal1sisofthe Ego,p. t4t.
The Group and the Person 29 militantactivit), in a reified social context createsa radical break with the sense of passivitythat comeswith participationin the usual institutions.It maybe that I shali later on come to see that I was myself conributing a certainactivism, an illusion of eilectiveness,a headlong rush forward. Yet I believethat no one who had the experienceof being a militant in one of those youthorganizationsor mass movements,in t.heCommunist Party or some splintergroup, will ever again be just the same as everyoneelse.Whether therewas real effectivenesshardly matters; certain kinds of action and concentration representa break with the habitual social processes, and in particularwith the modes of communication and expressionof feeling inheritedfrom the lamily. I have tried to schematize this break, this difference, by distinguishing between the subjectgroup and the objectgroup. This involvesto someextent reopening the questionof the distinction betweenintellectualsand manual rvorkers, a slight chanceoftaking up the desireofa group, howeverconcealed it may be, a chanceof escapingfrom the immutable determinism whose modelscome lrom the structufe of the nuclear family, the organization of labourin industrialsocieties(in terms of rvagesand of hierarchv),the army, t h ec h u r c ha n d t h e u n i v e r s i t l . A smallgroup of militants is somethingapart from society;the subversion it plansis not usually directed to something in the immediate future, exceptin such exceptional cases as that of Fidel Castro or the Latin American guerriilas. Its horizon is the boundary ofhistory itself: anything is possible, evenif in reality the universeremains opaque.Somethingof the same sort. existsin institutional pedagogy and institutional psychotherapy, Even in impossible, dead-endsituations,one tries to tinker with the institutional machinery, to producean eflecton somepart of it; the institutionsacquirea kind of plasticity, at least in the way they are representedin the sphere ol intention. Caslro,at the head of hundreds of thousandsof Cubans, unhesitatingly wentto \{'ar againstwhat he called 'organigrammism', or planning from the cenre. This is something that is a problem throughout all the so-called socialistsocieties.A certain concept of the institution, which I should call non-subjective, implies that the systemand its modifications exist to servean externalend, as part of a teieologicalsystem.There is a programme to fulfil, and a number of possibleoptions, but it is always a question of responding to specificdemandsto produce- production here being taken in the widest sense (it canreferto entertainmentor education as well as to consumergoods).The production of the institution remains a sub-whole wirhin production as a whole.It is a residue,suggestingwhat Lacan callsthe objetpetit'a'.What are the laws governing the formation o[ institutions? Is there not a general problemof the production of institutions?
3o
InstitutionalPsychotheraPv
s r o d u c ei n s t i t u t i o n s ; t hcer e a t i v er u m b l i n g s o l e c o l l d s a yt h a r r e y o l u t i o n p that ulrleashedthe French revolution rvere luxuriant in this respect'But bewareof spelling revolution with a capitai R. Things happenedby way of modilications,and any masterplan remainedentirel)'abstractand successive constitunever put into eflect:this is evident in, for instance,the successive tions drafted bv the French revolution.Only with the historvof the rvorkers' movementsince lvlarx have we seena consciousplan settingout to produce institutional lnodelsfor reorgauizingthe structureof the Statenon-r"rtopian witl'r a view to its I'uturer',itheling awa.v- for starling up a revolutionary power, for setting up political and trade-union bodies aiming (at least in theorv) to fuifil the demands of the class struggle' It is noteworthy that organizationalproblems have olten more truly engenderedsplinter groups, major battles, even schisms,than have ideologicaldivergences;and with Lelinism, the problem of organizationbecamethe primordial one. Debates abor-rtthe party line, the signifiedand the signification\'\'erevery often no more rh,{l'la lront to conceallvhat was at issueat the levelof the organization' ai signifier,which at timeswent down to the tiniestdetail.Who shouldconrol rl.risor that authority?Horv should the unions be relatedto the Party?What tvasto be the role ofthe soviets? of There is of course a generai problem about the subjectiveprocesses 'breakthroughgroups' tl-rroughout history,but for the moment I r'r'antsimply to fbcusthe idea ol the subjectgroup on the birth ofrevolutionarygroups,ru These groups make a spccial point of linking. or tr)'ing to link, theit theil revolutionaryprogramme. Hisorg:rnizationoptions ver)' closel,v "vith event that was stifled by the great creative to one torically,,we can point hegemonyof stalinism in the USSR and in the Communist International. Even today, most revolutionarytendenciesstili seeorganizationalproblems in the lramework within which thev were lormulated fift,vvearsago by Lenin. Irnperialism,on the other hand, seemsto have been capableof producing relative institutional solutions enabling it to escapefrom even the most catastrophicordeals.After the crisisof I929 it producedthe Nen' Deal; after and re-mould tl-reSecondWolld \\rar it was able to organize'reconstruction' effected partial measures) only were, These olcourse. relations. iuternational bv tria.l and error, since the dominant imperialism had lormulated no consistentpolicy or aims. But in the terms of production,thev have enabled inrperialism to remain considerablvin advance ol the so-calledsocialist Statesin its capacity for institutional creativity. But in the socialistStates of the maior projectsofreform since r956 hasi-etseenthe light ofday. In nor"re this respectit is the diflerencethat is crucial.At the time olthe first Five Year Plan, Russia r.vasintroducing capitalist Productionplans into its lactories r o . l t u o u l d b e p a r t i c u l a r l vi n t c r e s t i n gt o a p p l v r h i s i d e a t o p o p u l a r r e l i g i o u sh e r e s i e s
The Group and the Person 3 r Eventod.a1,, in both the technologicaland the industrialfields,the organization of'production and even the internal structure of companiesare still largelydependenton the modelsset up by capitalisrn.We are alsoseeingthe importationinto Russia and Czechoslovakiaof the capitalist partern of mass consumption ofcars. It looksas though the plannedstructureofthe socialist States is not capableolpermitting the emergence olanv form of originalsocial creativitvin responseto the dentandsofdiflerentsocialgroups.Verv diflerent wasthe situationafter the r9r7 revolution, beforethe Stalinist terror took over.Though the sovietsrapidly degeneratedat the masslevel, there were someintensivelycreative 1.earsin a number of specificareas - cinema, architecture, education,sexuality,etc. Even Freudianismmade considerable progress. The r 9 r 7 revolution is still chargedwith a powerful group Eros, and it will Iong continue to exercisethat porver: the vast lorcesofsocial creativity unleashed by it illuminated the field ofresearchin all spheres. \\'e may rvellbe witnessingthe darvnof a new revolutionarydevelopmer-rt thatwill follow on lrom that sombre period, but we are still too closeto the dailver,entsofhistorl.to seeit clearlv.The extraordinaryway that bureaucratization tookplacein the BolshevikParty and the sovietStateunderStalin seemsto me comparableto neurotic processes that becomemore violent as the instinctsunderlying them are more powerful. The Stalin dictatorship I couldneverhave taken so excessivea lorm had it not neededto repressthe fastest-florr'ing currentolsocial expressionthe world haseverknown. It must I alsobe recognizedthat the voluntarismofthe Leninist organizationand its I s,vstematic mistrust of the spontaneityof the massesundoubtediyled it to missseeingthe revolutionarypossibilitiesrepresentedby the soviets.In fact thereneverwasany real theory of sovietorganizationin Leninism:'All power to the soviets'was only a transitional slogan, and the sovietswere soon centralized to suit the Bolsheviks'determinationto maintain absolutecontrol of all porverin view of the rise of counter-revolutionaryattack fi-om both withinand without. The only institutionsthat remainedimportant were the Stateporr'er,the Party and the armv. The systemsof organizationaldecentralizationestablished by the BolshevikParty during the yearsofunderground struggle disappearedin lavour of centralism.The Internationalwas militarizedrvilly-nilly, and the various organizationsin sympathy with Bolshevism were made to accept the absurd 'Trventy-One Points'. Enormous revolutionarvlorcesall over the world thus found themselvesarbitrarily cut off from their proper sociaicontext, and some Communist bodiesnever really (The Communist movement was unable, above all, to become recovered. established and organizedin vast areas ofwhat we today call the Third World -presumablyto indicatethat it is'a world apart'.) The samepattern of organization (Partir - Central Committee - Politburo - secretariat- secretary-general;and mass organizations, links between
32
Institutional Psychotherapy
Partv and people,s16.)is just as disastrousin the internationalCommunist rro!'ementersa whole. The samesort of militant superstructures, established in a revolutionarycontext,are supposedto supply to the organizationalneeds o{'a highiy irrdustrializedsocialistState.This absurdity is productiveof the \4,orstl)ureaucraticperversions.How can the sarnehandfulof'menproposeto direct everything at once - State bodies,organizationsofl,oung people,of wolkers and ofpeasants,cultural activity, the armv, etc.,erc.- with noneof the intermediateauthoritieshavingthe leastautonor.r.r1, in working out its own line of actior-r? Whether or not it givesrise to contradictionswith this tendency or t.hat,or to confrontationsthat cannot be resolvedsimply bv arbitration liorri above. Never has the internationaiistideal fallen so lorvl The reaction ol the pro-Chinesemovementshas beento preacha return to Stalinistorthodoxy,as revisedand correctedbv Mao Tse-tung,but in fact it is hard ro seehorvthey rvill resolr.etheselundamental problerns.At the end of the iast century',a militant was someonelormed by the struggle, who could break with the dominant ideologvand could toleratethe absurditvof dailv life, the hurniliatiorrsof repression,and evendeath itself, becausethereu'as no doubt in his mind that everyblow to capitalismwas a stepon the h,ayto a socialistsociety. The only context in which we find such revolutionariestoday is that of guerrilla uarfare, of which Che Guevara has ieft us such an extraordinarv politic|. account in his Testarnettt| The political or syndical sr1,leof the Communist organizationsof today tends to be totally humourless.The bureaucrat experiencespolitics and svndicalisnrin the short term;he is oft.enfelt to be an outsiderat work, even though his comradesrecognizethe meritsof what he is doing,and rely on him - at his request* asone would rely on a public service.There ale exceptionsJ a great manv indeed.who are genuinemilitants of the peoplein thoseorganizations,but the party machinemistusts them, keepingthenron a tighr rein, and ends up bl'destrovingthem or trying to expeithem. it is alwavs the massof the peoplewho havecreatednew fcrrn.is ofstruggle: 'invented' it was thev r.vho soviets,thet,rvho set ap ad hacstrike committees, thev rvho first thought of'occupationsin t936. The Party and the unionshave systematicallvretreatedfrom the creativitv of the people;indeed,sincethe Stalin peliod, they have not n-lerelyretreatedbut have positivelyopposed innovation of any kind. One has only to recall the part played by the communists in France at the Liberation, when they used lorce as lvell as persuasionto reintegrateinto the framelr,orkolthe Stateall the new formsof struggleand organizationthat had emerged.This resultedin rvorkscommitteeswithout porver,and a Social Securitl,that is merely a form of delayed wagesto be nranipulatedbv managementand the Stateso as ro control the working classand so on.
The Group and the Person 33 It may be said that the working classmust simpll' e{Iecta 'restitution'ol these subjectiveprocedures,that they must becomea disciplinedarmv of militants and so on. Yet surelywhat they are seekingis somethingdiflerentthevrvantto producea visibleaim for their activitiesand struggles.To return tothenotionsI put forward provisionally,I would say that the revolutionary organizationhas become separated lrom the signifier of the working class's discourse, and becomeinsteadclosedin upon itselfand antagonisticto any expression ofsub.jectivitvon the part ofthe various sub-wholesand groups, thesubjectgroups spoken of by Marx. Group subjectivitv can then express itselfonj by way ofphantasy-making, which channelsit offinto the sphereof theimaginary.To be a worker, to be a young person,automaticallymeans sharinga particular kind of (most inadequate)group phantasy.To be a militantworker,a militant revolutionary,meansescapinglrom that imaginaryworld and becoming connectedto the real texture ofan organization, part of the prolongation of an open formalization of the historical process. In eflect, thesametext for analysisofsocietyand its classcontradictionsextends into both the text of a theoretical/politicalsystem and the texture of the organization. There is thus a double articulationat three levels:that of the spontaneous, creativeprocessesof the masses;that of their organizational expression; and that of the theoreticallormulation of their historical and strategic aims. Not having grasped this double articulalion, the workers' movement unknot'inglylalls into a bourgeoisindividualistideologi,.In reality,a group is not just the sum of a nurnber of individuals: the group does not move immediately lrom 'I' to 'you', from the leaderto the rank and frle,lrom the partyto themasses. A subjectgroup is not embodiedin a delegatedindividual whocanclaim to speakon its behalf: it is primarily an intentionto act, based on a provisionaltotalizationand producing somethingtrue in the developmentof its action..UnlikeAlthusser,the subjectgroup is not a theoretician producingconcepts;it producessignifiers,not signification;it producesthe institutionand institutionalization,not a party or a line; it modifies the generaldirectionofhistorl', but does not claim to write it; it interpretsthe situation,and with its truth illuminates all the formulations coexisting simultaneously in the workers' movement,Today, the truth olthe NLF in Vietnamand the Democratic Republic of Vietnam illuminates the whole rangeof possibilitieslor struggle against imperialism that now exist, and revealsthe real meaningofthe period ofpeaceful coexisrence that lollowed theYaltaand Potsdamagreements. Today, too, the struggleofrevolutionary organizations in Latin America brings into questionall the lormulationsol the workers'movementand all the sociologicaltheoriesrecognizedby the bourgeois mind. Yet one cannot say that Che Guevara,Ho Chi-minh, or the leadersofthe NLF are producersofphilosophicalconcepts:it is revolution-
g4
Institutional Psychotherapv
ary actionthat becomesspeechand interpretation,independentofany formal studl' and examinatiorrof the totality of what is said and done.This doesnot nlean that one has no right to sa,r'anything - on the contrary, one can say what one wants all the more lreely preciselybecause'what one saysis less irnportant than what is being done.Sa2ingis not always /oizg! Thi.sbringsus to a mofe generalproblenr:does'saying'meanan\,thingmore tharrthe productionofits own sense? Sureiy,what the wholeanall.sisof Capilal makesciear is precisel,v that behind every processolproduction, circulation and consumptionthereis an order ofsymbolicproductionthat constitutesthe very labric of everv relationship of prodrrction, circulation and consumption, and ofall the structura!orders,It is impossibleto separatethe productionof an) consumercornmodityfrom the institution that supportsthat production, The sarnecan be said of teaching,training, research,etc.The Statemachine and the machine ofrepression produce anti-production, that is to say signifiers that exist to block and preventthe emergenceofany strbjectiveprocesson the part of the group. I believer.,u'e should think of repression.or the existenceof the State,or bureaucratization.not as passiveor inert, but as dynamic.Just as Freud could talk
The Group and the Person 35 phantasymechanismsof this nature are still at work in capitalist societies. The rvorkers'movement seemsto be peculiarl,vunfitted to recognizethose mechanisms; it relatessubjectiveprocessesto individual phenomena,and lails to recognizethe series of phantasies which actually make up the real fabricol the whole organizationand solidity ol the masses.To achieveany understanding ofsocial groups, one must get rid ofone kind ofrationalistpositivist vision of the individual (and of history). One must be capableof grasping the unitiesunderlyinghistoricalphenomena,the modesof symbolic communicationproper to groups (where there is often no mode of spoken contract),the systemsthat enable individuals not to lose themselvesin interpersonal relationships,and so on. To me it is all reminiscentof a flock of migratingbirds: it has its own structure, the shape it makes in the air, its function,its direction - and all determined without benefit of a single central committee meeting,or elaborationof a correctline. Generallyspeaking,our understanding of group phenomenais very inadequate.Primitive societies arecollectivelylar better ethnologiststhan the scholarssent out to study them.The gangof young men that lorms spontaneouslyin a sectionof town doesnot recruit membersor chargea subscription;it is a matter of recognitionandinternalorganization.Organizingsucha collectivedependsnor only on the words that are said, but on the lormation of images underlying the constitution of any group, and theseseemto me somethingfundamental- the supportupon which all their other aims and objectsrest. I do not think one canfulll'graspthe acts!attitudesor inner life ofanl'group without grasping the thematicsand functions of its 'acting out' of phantasies.Hitherto the workers'movement has functioned only by way of an idealist approach to theseproblems.There is, lor instance,no descriptionofthe specialcharacteristicsof theworkingclassthat establishedthe ParisCommune, no description of its creative imagination. Bourgeois historians o{Ier such meaningless comments as that 'the Hungarian workerswere courageous',and then pass on to a formal,self-enclosed analysisof the variouselementsof socialgroups as though they had no bearing on the problems of the class struggle or organizationalstrategy, and without reference to the lact that the laws governing the group's formations of images are different in kind from contractuallarvs- like those relative to setting up a limited company, for instance,or the French Association Law of r 9o r . You cannot relate the sum ol' a group'sphantasyphenomenato any s_vstem of deductionsworking only with motivations made fully explicit at the rational level. There are some momentsin historywhen repressedmotivesemerge,a whr-.rle phantasyorder, that can be translated,among other things, into phenomenaof collective identification with a leader- for instanceNazism. The individual 'I' asks whcrethe imageis, the identifying image that makesus all membersof 'Big Boy's'gangrather than Jojo's';Jojo is that dark fellow with the motor-bike,
36
Institutional Psychotherapy
,.r'herezrs it may be someone- anvone- else who has the characteristics demandedby the phantasyworld of this particulargroup.Similarlv' the great leadersof history were peopleu'ho servedas somethingon which to hang 'be 'be When Jojo, or Hitler, tells people to Jojos' or society'sphar.rtasies. of kind Hitlers', thel' a;" not sPeakingso much as circulatinga particular find we shall that particularJojo inrage to be used in the group:'Through ourselves.'But who actually saYSthis?The whole point is that no one sa2sit, becauseif one were to saVit to oleself, it would becomesomethingdifferent. At the level of the group's phantasystructure' we no longer {ind language 'I' and an other through words and a operating in this way, setting up an system of significations.There is, to start rvith, a kind of solidification,a settirrg inro a mass; thisis us,and other people are different, and usually not worth bothering with - there is no communication possible.There is a territorializationof phantas;-,an imagining of the grouP as a body, that absorbssubjectivity into itself. From this there flow all the phenomenaof nrisunderstanding,racism, regionalism,nationalism and other archaisms that have utterly defeatedthe understandingofsocial theorists .AndrdN{alrauxoncesaid on televisionthat the nineteenthcenturylvasthe centLrryof internationalism,whereasthe twentiethis the centarvof national' ism. He might have added without exaggerationthat it is also the centuryof regionalism and particularism. In sornebig cities in America' going from one s6eet into the next is like changing tribes. Yet there is an ever-increasing uliversalitv of scientific signifiers;production becomesmore worldwide everv day; every advancein scholarshipis taken uP b.vresearcherseveryrvhere; it is conceivablethat there might one dav be a single supgr' inlormation-machinethat couid be usedfor hundredsof thousandsoldi{IerIn the scientificfield, ever.vthingtoda) is shared:the sameis ent researchers. tiue of literature,art and so on. However,this doesnot mean that we are not a generaldrawing inwards in the field. not of the real, but the n,itnessir.rg imaginary, and the imaginary at its most regressive.In fact, the two phenomenaare complementary:it isjust when thereis most universalitythat n,e feel the need to return as lar as possible to national and regional 'de-code'and Cistinctness.The more capitalism follows its tendency to ,cle-territorialize', artificial the more does it seek to awaken or re-arryaken territorialitiesand residual errcodings,thus moving to counteractits own teDdency. How can we understand these group functions of the imaginary, and all their variations?How can we get away from that persistentcouple:machinic universalityand archaicparticularitY?My distinctionbetweenthe two types ol-groupis not an absoluteone. I sa.vthat the subjectgroup is articulatedlike a languageand iinks itself to the sum of historicaldiscourse,rvhereasthe dependent group is structured according to a spatial mode, and has a
The Group and the Person g7 specificallv imaginary mode of represenration,thar it is the medium of the groupphantasies;in reality, however, we are dealing not so much ,"vithtr.t,o sortsof group, but two functions, and the two may even coincide. A passive groupcan suddenlythrow up a mode ofsubjectivity that developsa whole system of tensions,a whole internal dynamic. on the other hand, any subject groupwill havephaseswhen it gets bogged down at the level of the imaginary: then,ilit is to avoid becoming the prisoner of its own phantasies,irs active principlemust be recovered by way of a system of analytic interpretation. Onemight perhaps sa)' rhat the dependent group permanently represenrsa potentialsub-wholeofthe subject group,lrand, as a counrerpolntto the formulations of Lacan, one might add that only a partial, detachedi.stitutionalobjectcan provide it with a basis. Takenvo other examples: First,the psychiatrichospital.This is a srrucruretotally dependenron rhe 'arioussocialsystemsthat support it - the state, SocialsecJrity and so on. Groupphantasiesare built up around finance, mental illness,the psychiatrist,the nurse, etc. In any particular department, however, u ..pu.uta objectivemay be established that leads to a profound reordering of thut phantasizing. That objectivemight be a therapeuticclub. We may:saythat thatclubis the institutionalobjective(Lacan's objet petit'a', arrheinstitutional level)rhat makesit possibleto start up an analytic process.clearly the analvticalstructure, the anal\ser, is not the therapeutic club itself, but something dependentupon that institutionalobiective,which I havedefined elsewhere as an institutional r.acuole.It might. for example,be a group of nurses, psychiarrists or patients that forms that analytical,hollow srruc;ure whereunconsciousphenomena can be deciphered, and which ficr a time bringsa subject group into being wirhin the massive strucrure of rhe psychiatrichospital. Second, the Communist Party. Like its massorganizations(trade unior-rs, youthorganizations, women's organizations,etc.) the Party can be wholly manipulated by all the structuresof a bourgeoisState, and can work as a hctor for integration.In a senseone can e'en say that the developmentofa modern,capitalistState needssuch organizationsofworkers by workers in order to regulatethe relations of production. The crushing of rvorkers, organizations in Spainafter i936 causeda considerabledelay to rhe proeress of Spanishcapitalism, whereas the various ways of integrating the working dasspromotedin thosecountries that had popular lronts in ,r 936, or national frontsin 1945,enabled the State and the various social orsanizations introduced by the bourgeoisieto readjust,and to producene* strJctu.esand new relationsof production lavouring the development of the capitalist I r , T h i s u ' o u l db e a w a v o u ! o f R u s s e l l ' s p a r a d o x ,a w , a yo f a v o i d i n g r c i f y i n g i t a s t o r a i i z i n g a
38
Institutional Psychotherap.v
economyas a whole (salarvdifferentials,wages,bargainingover conditions, etc.). Thus one can seehow, in a sense,the subordinateinstitutionalobject thar the Paltl'or the CGT (the CommunistTrade Llnion Federation) representsas fir as the workinc class are concernedhelps to keep the capitaliststructurein good repair. On the other hand - and to explain this calls for a topologicalexampleof some complexitl,- that same passiveinstitutionalobject,indirectly controlled bl the bourgeoisie,may give rise within itself to the developmentof new processes of subjectivation.This is undoubtedlythe caseon the smallest scale,in the Partv cell and the union chapel.The lact that the working class, once its revolutionarvinstinctshave been aroused,persistsin studyingand getting to knou' itself through this developmentwithin a dependentgroup crearesrensionsand contradictionsrrhich, though not immediatelvvisibleto oursiders(not quoted in the pressor the ofFcialstatementsof the leaders),still producea u'hoielange oflragmentedbut real subjectivation. A group phantasyis not the sameas an individual phantasy,or anv sumof indir,iduai phantasies,or the phantasvof a particular group.l2 Every individual phantasyleadsback to the individual in his desiringsolitude.But it can happen that a particuiar phantasy,originatingwithin an individual or a p.rrticulargroup, becomesa kind of collectivecurrenc.y,l3 put into circulation and providing a basis for group phantasizing. Similarly, as Freud pointed out, we pass lrom the order of neurotic structure to the stage of group The group mar', for iustance,organize its phantasiesaround a Jornnti.on. leader,a-successluifigure, a doctor, or some such. That chosenindividual pliiys the role of a kind of signifving mirror, upon r,r'hichthe collective phantasy-makingis relracted.It mav appear that a particular bureaucratic or maladjustedpersonalityis working againstthe interestsof the group,when in lact both his personalityand his action are interpretedonlv in termsof the eroup. This dialectic cannot be confined to the plane of the imaginary. Incleed,the split between the tltalitaian ideal of the group and its various partial phantasy processesproduces cleavagesthat may put the group in a position to escapelrom its corporizedand spatializingphantasyrepresentation. IIthe processthat seems,at the levelof the individual authority, to be ,rver-determined and hedgedin by'the Oedipuscomplexis transposedto the level ofgroup phantasizing,it actuallyintroducesthe possibilitvofa revolutionarl, re-ordering.In eflect,identificationwith the prevailingimagesolthe group is by no meansalways static, for the badgeolmembership often has links with narcissisticand death instincts that it is hard to define. Do 'Ihis r r. is the dilTercncebetweenmv idea ofgroup phantasy and Bion's idea of the phantasyoftir group. r j . A n d , c o n r , e r s e l yi ,s n o r r h e i n d i v i d u a l o h a n t a s yt h e i n d i v i d u a t e ds m a l l c h a n g eo f c o l l e c t i r e nhan tasv nroduction?
The Group and the Person 39 individualphantasiestake shapeand changein the group, or is it the other wayround?One could equally say that they are nor fundamentallypart of anythingoutsidethe group, and that it is a sheeraccident that rhey have fallenbackon that particular'body'- an alienatingand Iaughablefiction,the of an individual driven into solitude and anxietv preciselv societl'misunderstands and represses the real body and its desire.In eithercase,this embody'ingof the individual phantasyupon the group,or this latching on ofthe individual to the group phantasv,transfersonro rhe group thedamagingeflectolthosepartial objecrs- objet petit a'- describedby Lacan asthe oral or anal object, the voice, the look and so on, governedby the totalityof the phallic function, and constituting a threshold ol existential realitythat the subject cannot cross.Hon'ever,group phantasizinghas no 'safetyrail' to compare rvith those rhat prolect the libidinal instinctual system, and has to dependon temporary and unstablehomeostaticequilibria.Wordscannot really serveto mediate its desire; they operateon behalf of thelaw.Groups opt for the sign and the insignia rather rhan for the signifier, The order of the spoken rvord tips over into slogans. If, as Lacan savs, the ation ol the subject resultslrorn one signifier relating to another, thengroup subjectivity is recognizable rarher in a splitting, a Spaltung,the of a sub-whole that supposedlyrepresentsthe legitimacy and ty'olthe group In other words, this remains a lundamentally precariousprocess.The tendencyis to return to phenomena of imaginary explosion or phallicization her than to coherentdiscourse.From this point ofview, apart from disinguishing betweenindividual and group phantasy,one can alsodistinguish t ordersofgroup phantasy:on the one hand, the basicphantasiesthat dependon the subordinatecharacter of the group and, on the other, the sitionalphantasiesconnectedrvirh the internal processofsubjectivation corresponding to various reorganizationswithin rhe eroup. trVeare led to istinguishtu'o possibletypes ofobject: establishedinstitutions,and tranional objects.r+ With the first, the institution never sets out to face the oltheinstitutionalobject,though it is obsessed by it;just as rhechurch itsGodand hasno wish to changehim, soa dominant classhaspou er and not considerrr'hetherit might not be betterto give thar power to anyone !lVith thesecond,on the other hand, a revolutionarymovementis a good mpleof somethingthat keepsaskingwhetherit is right, whetherit should totallytranslormingitself, correctingits aim and so on. Of courseall the tutionalobjectsin a fixed societycontinueto evolveregardless,but their tionis not recognized.One myth is replacedbl'another,one religionby . t4. The notionofaniiltitulilnal lbjectiscomplementan to the'parr object'ofFreudian theory and 'transitional object' as originally defined by D. W. !Vinnicott ,,c1.La Ps2chanaltu,5. Presses de France, r95g)
40
Institutional Psychotherapv
zurother,iryhichmav result in a ruthlesswar and end in deadlock.Whena collapses,bad moneydrivesout good,the gold monetar! or economics-vstem standardis replacedby basemetal, and the economyis convulsed.Similarly when a marriage fails; it u,asbasedon a contract of a kind not fundamentally different liom a banking contract, and there is no scopefor development,The contracrcan be changedbv divorce, but that is only a legal procedureand does r.rotfundamentallvsolve anything. Indeed the chain is snappedat its weakestlink: the children are split in two w'ithout any thought of conse' quencesin the sphereof the imaginarv.When a revolutionaryparty changes theories,however, there is no logical reasonwhy it should lead to a tragedy,or a religious \4'ar: the regirnen of the word still tries to readjust the old formulationsto brins them into harmonv with the new, To foster analysisand interventionin group phantas,v(including family groups) would implv a considerationof preciselythesephenomenaof the imaginary. Take another example:generationsof miners have worked in a particltlal mine, and it has becomea kind of religion to them; one day, the technocrats suddenly realize that the coal they produce is no longer profitable. This of coursetakesno accountof the e{Iecton the miners: thoseofa certain age are told that they are to retire early, lvhile others are oflered re-training schemes.Similar things happen in Africa, Latin America and Asia, where peopleswho have had the samesocialorganizationfor thousands of years are steamrollered out of existence by the intrusion of a capitalist systerr interestedonly in the most e{ficientwavs of producing cotton oI rubber. These are extremeexamoles,but thev are the losical extensionof a rnultitude of situations - those of children, of w'omen, of the mad, hornosexuals,ofblacks. In disregarding or failing to recognizesuch problerns may be of group phantasy,we createdisastersu,hoseultimate consequences immeasurable. Analt,sing the institutional object neans channelling the action of the imasinzrtionbetweenone structureatrdanother;it is not unlikewhat happens to an animal in the moultinq season.To move lrom one representation oneself to anotherr though it may involve crises,at least retains continuity. When an animal loses its coat it remains itself, but in the social order, ren-rovingthe coat shatters the world of the imaginarv and annihilates generations.When the group is spiit up, when it doesnot know the scopeofits phantirsiesand has no control of then-r,it developsa kind of schizophrenic action !r,ithin itsell: the phantasl' mechanismsof identification, and of thesell operate all the more freely and independently as the function of the word as collectiveutteranceis replacedby a sructural formation ofnon-subjec utterances.While the group discoursesin a vacuum about its aims and pul'poscs,identificationshal,ethe samekind of lreerein as theywould havein a schizophrenicrvhosespeechis disconnectedlrom bodily representa
The Group and the Person 4r andrr'hosr: phantasl'world, lreed from reality, can opcrateon its own lo a int of hallucinationand delusion,A group will end up by hallucinating withitsphantasies in just the sameway. If it is to interpret them, it will have toresortto irrationalacts,wild gestures,suicidalbehaviour,play-actingolall s, until thosephantasiescan find some means of becomingpresentto 'esand manifestingthemselvesin the order of representation. I saidearlierthat the unconsciousis in direct contactrvith history.But onlv certainconditions.The fundamentalproblemin institutionalanall,siscan expressed like this:is it absurd to think that socialgroupscan overcomethe contradictionbetweena processol production that reinforcesthe mechanisms groupalienation,and a processof bringingto light the conscioussubject that s and the unconscioussubject,this latter being a processthat graduallv dispels moreand more of the phantasiesthat causepeopleto turn to God, to science or to any othersupposedsourceofknowledge?In other words,can rhe at once pursue its economic and social objectiveswhile allowing ualsto maintain their own accessto desireand someunderstandinsof r owndestiny?Or, better still: can the group lace the problem of its own th?Can a group rvith a historicmissionenvisagethe end of that missionthe Stateenvisagethe withering awa1,of the State?Can revolutionary esenvisage the end of their so-calledmissionto lead the masses? Thisleadsme to stressthe distinctionbetweengroup phantasyas it relates dependent groups,and the transitionalphantasyofindependent subject Thereis a kind olphantasizingthat appearsin static societiesin the of myths,and in bureaucratizedsocietiesin the form o[ roles.u,hich ucesthe most wonderful narratives:'When I'm twenty-fiveI'll be an r; then a coloneland later on a general;I'll get a medal when I retire; I'll die . , .' But group phantasizingis somethingmore than this,because includesan additional referencepoint that is not centredon a particular ject,or on the individual'sparticular placein the socialscale:'l'r,e beenin Frencharmy lor a long time; the French army has ahvaysexisted,it is , so if I keep my place in the hierarchy, I too shall have somerhingof eternal.This makeslife easierwhen I'm frightenedof dying, or when mv calls me a fool. After all, I am a regimental sergeant majorl' The titutionalobject underlving the phantasy of military rank ('I'm not ') serr.es to unfurl a range ofrelerencesofa homosexualnature that idessocietl'witha blind and relativelyhomogeneous body of peoplewho ink lrom anv self-questioningabout lile and death, and who are ready to e anv repression,to torture, to bombard civilian populationswith lm and so on. The continuationin time of the institution at the level of syis thusa kind ofimplicit supporrlor the denialofthe realityofdeath the individuallevel. The capitalist controlling severaltrusts also draws lrom this 'senseofeternity'. In his position at the rop ofthe hierarchl',
+2
Institutional Psychotherapy
he fulfils a kind of'priestlyfunction for thosebelow, ritualizing eternityand coniuringaway death.He is the servantof God/Capital.Facedwith pain and alraid of desire,the individual clingsto hisjob, his role in the family and the other functionsthat provide alienatingphantasvsupports.In the dependent group, phantasvmasksthe central truths ofexistence,but none the less,via the dialecticofsignifiers,part objects,and the way theseintersectwith the sequencesofhistory, it keepsin being the possibilityofan emergenceofthe truth. Would a group whosephantas) functionswere working rvell producethe transitionalphantasiesofa subjectgroup?At [,a Borde,for instance,whena group feelsthat it is getting somewhere,that it is achievingsomething,the most thanklesstaskstakeon a quite di{ferentmeaning,evensuchtediousjobs as taking up paving stones or working on an assemblv-line.At such a mornent, people's positions in relation to one another, their individual their peculiarst.vle,their way of speakingand so on, all take characteristics, you leel that you know people better and take more a new meaningl on interest in them. In a psychiatric r,vardwhere an analytic processaiming to established- though it never survives producesuch an eflectis successfully lor long everythinginhibiting or threateningin the differentiationofroles can be doneaway with: everyonebecomes'oneofus'though that includesthe whoie particularist folk-memory that that phrase implies. Absurd though such folklorism may seem,it does not pr€vent the'senseof belonging'from being eflective.It is a f;actthat ifa boy is to learn to read or to stop wettinghis trousers)he must be recognizedas being'at home', being'one of us'. If he crossesthat threshold and becomesre-territorialized,his problemsare no ionger posedin terms of phantasy; he becomeshimselfagain in the group, and 'When shallI managesto rid himselfof the questionthat had haunted him: get to be there,to be part ol thd!, to be "one of them"?' As long as he failsin that, his compulsivepursuit ofthat goal preventshis doing anything elseat all. T'l.risgetting to the limits of the imagination seems to me to be the fundamental problem of setting up any management body that is not to be technocratic,any massparticipationbody for whateverpurposethat is notto be unhealthily rationalist. It is not a matter of an independentcategory:if these phantasizing lormations are not explored anah'tically, they operateas death-dealingimpulses.From the point when I set out to enjoy my mem' bershipofthe Bowls Club, I can say that I am dead,in the senseofthe death inherentin the eternityof Bowls Clubs. On the other hand, if a group letsme short-circuitits action with a problematicthat is open to revolution,even that group assuresme that revolution will certainly not save my life, or provideanv solutionto certainsortsofproblem, but that its role is, in a sense, precisel,vto prevent my being in too much of a hurry to run away from that
The Group and the Person 43 tic, then, most assuredly,the transitionalphantasylormationsof groupwill enableme to make progress. The demand lor revolution is not essentiallyor exclusivelyat the level of goods;it is directed equally to taking account ofdesire. Revolutiontheory,to the extent that it keeps its demands solely at the level of asingpeople'smeansof consumption,indirectlyreinforcesan attitudeof ivity on the part of the working class.A communist socierymust bc not with referenceto consumption, but to the desireand the goalsof ind. The philosophicrationalismthat dominatesall the expressions of workers'movement like a super-ego ficstersthe resurgenceof the old of paradisein anotherworld, and the promiseof a narcissisticfusion theabsolute.Communist partiesare by way of having scientific'knowl'ofhow to createa lorm oforsanization that would satisfythe basicneeds all individuals.What a falseclaim! There can be socialplanning in terms of izing production - though there still remain a lot of unanswered ions- but it cannot claim to be able to giveaprioi answersin terms of the objectives ofindividualsand subjectgroups. All of rvhichis just to say yet again that the ways to truth are, and will nueto be,an individual matter. I realizethat what I am sayineherecan interpreted as an appealto 'respecthuman values'and other nonsenseof kind. Such interpretationsare convenient,becausethey spare one the ity of seekingfurther for an answer to the problem. I can hear some saying,'There's a man who hasn't got over his experienceof the nistPartyand ofthe groupusculesi5 he'sbeenin. But all he had to do stopgoing!'Bravingridicule,however,I persistin declaringthat what is issueis quite different. It is, first of all, at the core of the revolutionary - not the war of u,ords,but the real strugglebeingwaged themselves guerrillas and others.Either we fall into post-Stalinistthinking and come grief,or we find.pnotherway and survive. There are a lot of other things too - far more serious than wonderins herone can work out some compromisebetweenthe bureaucratof the mentand desire.Either the revolutionaryworkers'movement and the will recover their speech via collectiwagentsof utterancethat will that they are not caught up again in anti-productionrelations(as asa work of analysiscan be a guarantee), or matters u.ill go lrom bad to . It is obviousthat the bourgeoisieofpresent-dayneo-capitalism are not isieand are not going to becomeone: they are undoubtedlythe t that history has ever produced. They will not find an effectiveway They will keeptrying to cobble things together, bur alwal's too late and 'Groupuscules' designate the ensemble of little groups lound on the left of the l-rench Party in thr period leading up to r968, a pejorative c o n n o t a t i o n o f t h e P a r t y but later assumedby the groups thcmselves
4+
Institutional Ps,vchotherapy
irrelevantly,as rvith aU their great projectsto help w,hattheir expertscovlv describeas the'developingcountries'. It is quite simple, then. Unless there is some drastic change,thingsare trndo,btedly going to go very badly indeed,and in proporrionas rhe cracks are a thousandtimesdeeperthan thosethat riddled the structurebeforer g3g, we shall have to undergofascismsa thousandtimes more friehtful.
Psychiatryand Anti-Psychoanalysis'
-jAcquESBRocHIER:How did you personallyget involvedin what we y call'the anti-psychiatrybusiness'? LIx GUATTART: \4tell,6rst olail, BasagliaandJervis came to l,a Bolde in or '66, and had some articles published in the review Recherches.'fhen there arosenot so much a differenceof ideasas a di{Ierenceof style.They were lot remotely interested in our experiments to reform institutional otherapy.The situation in Italy was alreadyquite different,and their werefar more revolutionary. Then there was the Engiish strain, with ingand Cooper,who were also published \n Recherches. They came to study 'alienated on the theme of organizedby Maud Mannoni and Recherches hood'.Their break-awayfrom ordinary institutionshad very little in eitherwith ours at La Borde. or with Maud Mannoni or with Lacan. teron,thesedifferencesofstyle came to reveal more profound divergences. mysellhavealso changed a great deal since that period. 1. e.;Jusnvhatis anti-.psychiatry? ,o.: Primarily a literary phenomenon,taken up by the mass media. It lrom thosetwo cenres in England and ltaly, but its appearance public interestin suchproblems, ledthelact that therewas considerable thecontextof the 'new culture' that was cominginto existence.But it must admittedthat, up to now, all that has been written, or said, or done in ncehas involved only a lew nurseswho were unhappy with the existing ation and a few dozen psychiatrists: the real interest in anti-psychiatry beenamong the general public. Today, one ol the 'inventors' of anti-psychiatrv, Laing, is no longer nectedwith it; he sayshe has neverusedthe term. Basagliabelievesit is a ification that must be exposed. Nleanwhile, in France, it has become ing of a iiterary and cinematic genre. Peopleearn a lot of money ishinglittle bookswith titles like 'Never Again Will I Be a Psychiatrist',
AgainWill I Bea Nurse','NeverAgainWill I BeMad'. Groupuscules
formedin its wake,like Poulidor. r. Somcviewseiicitedb,vJean-JacquesBrochier and published in lc,Vagalinc Lilliraire,a special ' L e M o u v e m en t d e s i d i e s d e M a i r en t i r l e d 968',May t q76
+6
Institutional Ps-vchotheraPY
has marked But what irasreally beenirnportant is the way ant'i-psychiatry a beginning of awareness,not only in the generalpublic, but even amgng ,mental health workers', In my view, the discover,volthe link p.of."..ionui has been betlveen ps-vchiatricrepressionand other forms of repression repercussions its all felt having far lrom u'e are and significant, .,]or*ourl,u -vet. has been paftl)'r'itiated bv certain schoolsof However, that zrrvareness a it good excuseto knock psychiatrv- leavingit to who found psychoanaiysis -be a undersroodthat we, with our little couches,cure peoplervithout laying hand on thenr,without ever hurting anvbodv' '68, in the sensethat NIay t.-1.n.:Anti-psychiatrycan be connectedwith lv'Iav ';68 hospitals,like prisons, Mental *u, essentiallyan artack on institutions. which, though institutions up locked people rvereinstitutions for.keeping in the middle of a ton'n, peopleliterally did not see' r-rsually r.c.: Doubts abor.rtprisonsand mental hospitalswere still very uncertainin with friendslike at the time having verv livelv discussiotls i 968. I r.ernember repressedthen be ing militants the ,,iai' Geismaror SergeJuly;we tried to see criminalsin poor, the was su{Ieringwho else ason the samelevelaseveryone ez \'Iarch the lormer \'et e'en patients. psl'chiat'ic Katangais,2 the gaol, 'Political ipontun.i.t, ,"ho ,uerejoini.g up with the Maoists were saying, prisoners,yes,and common law prisoners,ofcourse but not drug addictsl they can be manipudangerous, thev're denoutrced, musi be b'ug addicts l"t.j by the police,'and so on. lVhen ia'etried to talk about so-calledpolitical questionsin the samebreath as the problemsof madness,we were thought to that surprisesno one.But be eccentricif not positivelydangerous.Nowada-vs with the settingup of the point, this we reached that after'68 time ir was sorrre '68 therewasalot GIp:r anclother acti'ities of that kind. During the eventsof the employers and universities the of uphea!al in psvchiatric circles but 'colleqes thel'called what of moyement that up tIe1'set soondealt rvith rhat: 'Garde-Fou','Les Cahierspour la Folie', and the of psychiatry'.The GIA,a ,..t ull came on the scene much later, more or less in the wake of what Foucar-rltancl Deleuzerveredoing in relation to prisons.l\lemory can play ',68 mav rvell have Iiberated all sorts of re"'olutionarY funny rricks! N{ay attitudes,but people'sminds were still full of the bad old ideas,and it took drug some time to open them up on problenrslike madness,homosexuality, so on' and liberation women's addiction,delinquency,prostitution' '[ ' K a t a n e a i s ' w a s t h e n i c k n a m eg i v e n t o t h e g a n g so f t o u g h sw h o u ' e n t i n t o t h e S o r b o n n e z. he cluringthestudelrtoccuPationandbeatupthestudentsandl'andalizedthebuildings'Thename comes from the Katangan rebelsofthe Congoiesewar' c. Grotto for Inlormation about Prisons lVlentai Hospitals 4. Group for In{brmation about
Anti-Psychiatry and Anti-Ps.vchoanalysis 47 .y.-;.n.:What do you leel about institutionalpsychiatrytoday? n.c.: wonderfuMt's beginningto collapse.At alr levels.physically,to starr rvith:almost half of our psychiatrichospitalsare rvorkingat lessthan half of their full capacity.Somehospitalsthar costmillionsto build are almostemDtv (Mureaux for instance),which is partly why rhe cost per day of public hospitalizationfor the mentally ill has risen so astronomically.It is also coilapsingin people'sminds - no one believesin it any morel rhe policy of community menralcare (breakingdown the psychiatricinstitutioninto small units, each catering lor an area with an averagepopulation of6o,ooo) has at best a-chievednothing, and at worst resurtedin an intolerabiepopulation surveillance.This is speciallytrue ofchild psychiatry. But why are the hospitalsempty? 1.-.J.a.: r.o.: It's a complexphenomenon,with a number of causes.I can tell vou what they are - in no speciai order ofimportance. First, lack ofconfidence - the result,among other things,of the massmedia'scoverageof anti-psvchiatry. Then, perhapsparrly as a result of rhe community policy, a lot is now done outsidehospital.But I also think that the massiveuse of rranquillizershas playeda significantrole. They are pluggednor onrv by ps'chiairists, but by generalpractitionersand eventhe more or lessspecializedjournals; belorean inlant has time to give its first cry, it is givena sedativeto makeit shut up and go to sleep.Hence the diminution, evenin somecasesthe disappearance, of someof the sympromsofsociarbreakdownthat usedto land peopleup ih. psychiatrist'sor in the hospital.since about r955, chemo-therapy ", has been usedto put an end ro whar was calledhyperactivityin psychiatricirospitals. It keptout of hospitalnumbersofpeopleto whom a'chemicalstraitiacket,could n_owbe applied at home. But no one realizedat firsiFhat-ihe ellEctsof all this would be. It was important ro go on building psychiaric hospitals,especially sinceit helpedthe recoveryof the buirdingindustrv. somediparrements,itwa.s boasted,now really had adequatehospital praces(though what this really meantwas financingthe 'industrialization'of the building industry). But lo and behold,drugs had deflecteda large part oftheir ..gulu. clientele away fromthe hosp.itals, and somepsychiatristsweredeterminedthat the hosoitals shouldbe emptied.This led ro somequite seriousproblems,in poor areas, for instance,where the hospitalwas the major sourceof employment 1-1.a.:The hospiralsare emptying,and psychiatryno longerberieves in irserf. But if the hospitals were built to coniain and protect and lock away the insane,and psychiatrywas designedto care ror them, what is their po.i,ion nolv? r.c.: The luture solution, stilr far in the future for France, is already happeningin the USA. The moment someonefeelspeculiar, or breaksa
48
Institutional PsYchotheraPY
He is stuffedwith window, or takesdrugs, he is declaredto be schizophrenic' (One wonders another' as good ,.u,lquitiir.r., o, -.ihudone, one thing is as of complexities myriad the to better Preserve whetirerit might not have been in a number of closed been have hospitals psychiatric The the old nosolo"gyl) being exercisedin States,but that doesnot prevent psychiatricrePression's of psych-iatric in systems involved other wa-vs. People can then become control*ithoutu,"'y.ef..encetopsychiatricclassifications(tramps,down. a great many neuroticsJand and-outs,the old and so on). On the other hand, 'mad' under the old psvchiatric as even thoser+ho rvould have beendescribed at all, lut -g.!de;go classifications, no longer go through the hospitals given tranquillizers' and by doctors home at uisi[d are or psychoanalvsrs, 'raving lunatic' has becomea thing olthe past'.psychoanalyrhe f hougn ir.. ticmadne"sscanbefioundalmosteveryr-l.here.Somepsychoanalystsmakethe in a three-1'ear-old ludicrous cla.imthat they can diagnoseschizophrenia hospital- which is psychiatric the trashes nowadays everyone chilcl!Almost notjust the problem' but it is r-rotenough.What is at issueis an overall good, 'io.pltul, lorms of various the and community' the but psychiaric care in without finding no"vadays tongue olthe slip a make can't you psychoanalr'srs: Worst of all' someone .orn. totul strangerinterpreting it to you mercilessll' armoury' psychratrrc like M6nie Grdgoireis part of the new saying, then, is.that the psychiatric institution has 1.-1.1,:\{hat ,vou're vanished only to reappear in a more subtie way? rne is that all the great n.c.: Ycs, miniaturized. And rvhat also strikes which used !o consistof a repressiveorganizationslike schoolsor the army' to become lragmented and siigle institu"tional whole, are now tending very sooneveryone mistake: Illich's is this ,.uite.ed all over the place.I think own school,his own his repression, of mini-instrument his own will become army. The suPer-egowill invade everything' relationshipsof force' ir ,f,. gr.^t ..piessive entities there were still real every individual is ones' small the In struggle' of possibilities and there"fore influencesand feelingsthat bound hand and lbot by systemsofrelationships' caseimpl'vother lorms of there is no getting to g.lp, with, and which in any ,liberation,l As i see it, the policy of community psychiatry and.psychocorresponds to -the most analysis (and the two are now closely related) surveillanceand control' sophisticatedtechnocratic lorms of population find itself' And eventually will Por*'er still seekins itself, but Power that - aPart lrom power of in,terrns failure a still ittougtl the community policy is make a lresh start What the fi-eldof child psychiatry it could quite easily no policemen at street could be *o.. p.if..t than a repressionwhich needs via one's work' one's unobtrusively corners, but works permanentlYand
Anti-Psychiatryand Anti-Psychoanalysis 49 it is gradually neighbours,everywhere?The same goeslor psychoanalysis: gettingto be everywhere- at school,at home,on television. 3.-j.n.:But it's taken someknocks- especiallyfrom Deleuzeand yourself,in your Anti-Oedipus. r.c.: Don't you believeitl The psychoanalysts have remainedquite impervious. Naturally enough: you try asking butchers to stop selling meat for ideologicalreasons- or to becomevegetarians!Besides,from the consumer's point ofview psvchoanalysisworks. It works verv well indeed,and people keep coming back for more, It makes senseto pay a lot for anything so eflective- rather like a drug. And it raisesone a fraction in the social scale, which has a certain attraction, too. Anti-Oedipas was barely noticed. What is quite funny is that, when the book came out, the PsychoanalyticalSociety recommendedpeoplejust to ignore it, and the whole thing would blow over. Which is preciselywhat happenedl No, the most tangible e{Iectof Anti-Oedipus was that it short-circuitedthe connectionbetweenpsvchoanaiysis and the left. \4'hat strikes me is that the two chief victims of the critique of 1.-.J.e.: institutionsin the past lew years have beenour two great beardedfathers, N{arx and Freud. A lot of people have attacked Marx. But you and Gilles Deleuzehave made a specialassaulton Freud - becausethe institution of psychoanalysis, in whateverlorm, l.rFreud. r.c.: \'es, it is Freud - but in Franceit is alsoLacan. Psychoanalysis came to France very late, when men like Lagache or Boutonnier arrived at the universitl',Belorethe w'arpsychoanalysis barelyexistedin France.But it has caught up since then. It had tremendousresistanceto overcome,but was finally acceptedeverywhere,in Sainte-Anne,in all the laculties;evengeneral publishersare pouring it out. In other countries,on the other hand, the Freudianmovementhas beendead lor ten years.In the USA they still talk aboutJung,but it's onl.vpart o[their lolklore,Iike psychedelicmassageor Zen Buddhism.One might think the samething will happenin France.I doubt it. In Francethe Freudian establishmenthas had a great new leaseoflife rvith Lacanism.Lacanismisn'tjust a re-readingof Freud; it's somethingfar more despotic,both as a theoryand an institution,and far more rigid in its semiotic subjectionofthosewho acceptit. In fact,it could easilylead to a resurgence of psychoanalvsis all over the world, starting with the United States.Not only hasLacan comeout ofhis ghetto,but I think it is quite on the cardsthat he or his successorsmay one da.v manage to set up a real Psychoanalytical International. I think in future. Lacanism will come to be seenas distinct lrom Freudianism.Freudianismwas defensivein its attitude to medicine,to psychiatry,
50
Institutional PsYchotheraPY
to the academic world. Lacanism, on the colltrary, is offensive;it is a combatant theorr..In this connection,it is important to seeto what extent tt has influencedAlthusserism,and the eflectit has had on structuralismas a whole, especiallybecauseofits conceptofthe siglifier. Structuralismwould certainl;' never have existed' in the form in which we know it, without Lacanisrn. The polr,er and the a|nost religious authority of structuralism would not have been possible but for the Lacanians' introduction of a mathematico-linguisticconceptof the unconsciousthat tends essentiallyto divide desirelrom realit!. To believethat desirecan only be based(symbolically) on its orvn impotence,its own castration,implies a completeset of political and micro-politicalassumptions. beenset up - Lacanism? 1.-3.n.:So, accordingto vou, a new institurionhas the prototype of new E.c,: Yes. A testing-ground,an advance technolog.v, lorms of power.I t is rvonderful to succeedin totally subjectinganotherperson, to hold hirn bound hand and foot, financialh" emotionally,without even having the trorrble of making anv attempt at suggestion,interpretationor uppur.n, domirtation.The psychoanalvstof today doesn'tsay a word to his paiient, Sucha systemofchannellingthe iibido has beenachievedthat silence one is remindedolthoseideal lorms of teachingin which is all that is neecled. the m;rsterno longer had to sav anything, but merely to move his head (the a divinity who Latin nutus,,anod" was enough* and he then becamea numen, nodded to indicateapprobation). didn't talk of Lacan so much, but of Freud- and in 1,-1.e.:In Anti-Oedipus,l'ou dusting offhis statueyou left very little of it standing. r.c.: That was not deliberatel we advanced by stagesand gradual re' touching, but ol course,as the re-touchingproceeded,the inevitable hap\\rerever)'much bound up pened.Br-rtour objectionsto Freud in Anti-Oedipur w i t h o u r o b j e c t i o n st o L a c a n i s t n ts not this nervlorm of power)'oti 1.-1.n.:But what vou object to in ;1nti-Oedipus seein l-acanism,but oedipus itselt,the very foundationof Freudianism..{nd when the foundationscrumble, we all know what happens' You rvouldsa),that we are witnessingan inverseevolution:the psychiatric institution is rveakening,while the psychoanalyticinstitution is gaining strengthin a new lorm ofPower. is that psvchiatrydoesnot \\,ork,whcreaspsvchoanalvsis r.c.:The differer1ce works wonderfully.So wonderfullvthat it might evensucceedin resurrecting sornesectorso{'psychiatryone oftheseda1'sl
Mary Barnes,or Oedipus in Anti-Psychiatryr
In r965, a community of some twenty peoplewas formed around Ronald Laing. They establishedthemselvesin Kingsley Hall, an old building in a London suburb that had, to quote Joseph Berke, 'a long and honourable historvasa centrelor socialexperimentand radicalpoliticalactivity'.For five years the pioneers of anti-ps,vchiatryand patients making 'a career' as schizophrenicswere to explore together the world ol madness.Not the madnessof the mental hospital,but the madnesseachof us has within us, a madness'"vhichwas to be liberated in order tc remove inhibitions and svmptomsof all kinds.At Kingsley Hall thei,abolished,or tried to abolish,all divisionof rolesamong patients,psychiatrists,nursesand so on. No one had an,vofficial right to give or receiveorders or to lay down any rules. Kingsley Hall rvas to become an enclave of lreedom lrom the prevailing normality, a b a s el o r t h e c o u n t e r - c u l t u rm e ovement.2 The aim of rhe anri-psychiatristsis to get beyond the experimentsin community psychiatry; in their view these were so many more relormist projects,and did not really questionthe repressiveinstitutionsand traditional lrameworkof psychiatry.MaxwellJonesand David Cooper,3whoweretwo ofthe principal instigatorsoftheseendeavours,were to take an activepart in the life of Kingsley Hall. Anti-psl,chiatrycould rhus have its own tabularasa, so to say, its organlessbody, in which every part ofthe house- cellar, rool, kitchen,staircase,quiet room - and everyepisodein the collectivelife would function as a cog in a great machine, drawing each person beyond his immediateself and his own little problems,either towardshelpingeveryone else,or towards a descentinto himselfby a (sometimesdizzying) processof regression. This enclave of freedom, Kingsley Hall, was besiegedon all sides,the old world oozing in at every crack: the neighboursprotestedabout the noiseat night. local kids threw stonesat the windows,the relativeswere readv at the t. Le Noutel Obsentateur, zB N{ay r 973. z. Cf . counter'c'ultun:Tlv crealiondan A lrcrruriue socier-y, ed..J. Berke , pere' owen and Fire Books, r9 7 0 . 3. David Cooper, PychiatryandAntipttilatry, Tavistock, I 967.
ffi-ar.
\2
Institutional PsYchotheraPv
inmate to the merltal hosslightest pretext to cart o{f any over-excited pital.' actually came lrom '"t'ithin;though But the worst threat to Kingsley Hall still went on silently interiorizing lree liom identifiableconstrai;ts, people one could escapethe simplistic no furthermore, ar-rcl, .'*iui ,.prar.ions; (father,mother and child) that recluctio' of all things to the sameold triangle the boundsofnormalconsidered are what confinesall situationsthat exceed psvchoanalysis',. olOedipal it,vwithin the mould at Kingsley Hall, or no.t?lnterShould there be ,onl. *ini*ul iiscipline ' Aaron Esterson' leader of necine porver stl'ugglespoisoned the aimosphere a biography of Stalin^underhis with seen (he u'as the'harci-line'tendencv was eventuallvforcedout' arm, whereasLaing tendedto quote from Leninl)' right system to difficuli for the enterprise discoverthe ;;;;r." ther.ri*t'as still and the television press' the worse' of self-regulation'Then' to make matters the object of became Hall Kingsley in intellectualrrendiesnuuni.Jto.loin a kind of star of One of tht in*utt', Mary Barnes' became jealousie ""ir-"-fr[ii.i,y. -*uan..r, H . r . " p . rwhich i . n c e smade a t K i nher g sthe l e vfbcus H a l l hofa implacable vebeen,describedir.rabookbylvlary It is an astonishinglycandid Barnes and her p.y.ttiutti't, Joseph Berke's 'mad desire' and a to free confession;it is also both an admirable attemPt a brilliant voyage of discor"en' work of neo-behaviourist dogmatism,6 both andaworkcl{.unrepentant|a"nriliaiisminlinewiththeoldpuritantradition' \,'laryBarnes-thenradwoman-showsinafewchaptersofautobiography hiddenfaceof English-speaking what no anti-psvchiatristhasevershown:the anti-psYchiatrY. labelleda schizophrenic though Mary Barnesis a lbrmer nursewho was literally quite hysteric' She took she might equally have been classedas a 'regressioninto Her madness' of a Journey' into l;irg;; r..o*-.r,dution 'going dow n' pilot, her years of infanc.v'was rather in the st-vlelf a kamikaze from starvation'The wholeplace leadingher on occaslonto the vergeofdeath hospital or not? There *'as a violent ,"^, ir-r^. r-rProar- should she be"setttto to note that evenwhen shewas in crisisin the communit-v'But it is important she would only relate to a few easy; not stiil a phase of upsw'inglnalters were and nrysttctsmin whom"she massivelyinvestedher farnilialism ;;;i;, 'provocattve c o n r p a r e dt o t h e s i t u a t i o n i n I t a l r ' r v h e r el a r l e s s 4 . 1 h i s , h o w e v e r ,w a s n o t h i n g is still being repression ferocious reallv where Germanl" lt", experiments were stoppect,o',,iill ( s o z i a l i s t i s c h epsa r j e n t e n k o l l e c r i vi n) H e i d e l b e r g( s e ep 6 ? , u . l d o g u i n . , r h e , n e m b e r so f . t h es p K note3). MacGibbon & Kee' I97t' lvladnaru' a-founut'Thruugh .,r."Mory Borrrr' Tun.Accountso-f that reduced psychologv to the century this of rhe-b.ginning irom theory a 6. Beliaviourism is si the s t i n l u l i a n d t h e r e s p o n s eo e x t e r n a l b e n * ' e e n i n t e r a c t i o n s t u d v o f b e h a v i o r r r d, e f i n c d a s t h e of rends to reduce all hunran problems to Pr"biems subject. fhe neo-bchaviourism of today rhe socio-political problems o[power at everv level ignoring inlormarion, and conrmunicarion
N{ary Barnes,or Oedipus in Anti-psychiatry 53 mainly Ronnie (Laing), whom sheworshippedas a god, andJoe(Berke), who becamear onceher iather, her mother and'herspiritual lover. S h e t h u s s e t u p h e r o w n r i t t l e o e d i p a l g r o u n d r v h i c hc a u s e dg r e a t repercussionsin all the paranoiac tendenciesof the household. H"er pleu.u.. centredin the painful awarenessthat never ceasedto torment her ofall the harm she was doing around her. SheattackedLairrg,sset_up, eventhough it was so importarr ro her. The more guiity she feir rhe more she puniihed herselfandthe worseher statebecame,causingpanic reactions in the group she had reconsrituredthe vicious circle of fariiiiarism - but this time"there rlventv people involved, which naturallv multiplieclthe devasta_ ;;;: "".. she becarnea babl'again, and had ro be red from a bottre. she wandered naked,coveredin shit; shepisse.d in other people'sbeds;she brokethings up; or she would''t eat and wanted to let herselfdie. She tyrannir.o"Jo. d..ri, shestoppedhim lrom going out, and shepersecutedhis wife until, Jne da1r.he could sta'd it no longer, and punched her with his fist. one is inevitably remindedof the rvell-knownmethodsof the psychiarric hospitalrJoeBerke askedhimselfhow it could happen that a group of peopre whoseobj"ect was to cle-mystifi'rhesocialrelationsof disturbedfamiliescould reach the point of b e h a v i n gl i k ej u s t s u c ha l a m i l y . Fortunately, Mary ts1nes was an exceptiona.lcase * not everyoneat -Kingsley Hall behavedlike herr But she undoubtediy posed the .eal problems. How can we be so sure rhat understanding, ioi'e and ail tt.,. ltt.,., christian virtues, cornbinedwith a techniqueof n-rystical regression,can of themselves exorcisethe devilsolOedipal madness? Laing is cerrainly one of the peopli mosr deepli,comrnitted ro the enrer_ priseof demolishingpsvchiatry.He hasbrokendorvn the,"vails of the hospital, but one gets the impressionthat he remains the p'soner o|other walls still standingwithin himself;he has ror yet managed-rorree himselfof rhe worst constraint'the most dangerousof all double binds,T that of what Robert castel has called 'psychoanalvsm'- with its obsessronrvith significant lnterpretation,its 'false-bottomed'representations and shallowaepit s. Laing believedthat the neurotic a.lienationcould be dereated by centring the anal,vsis on the famill,, and its internal ,k'ots,. In his,",iew,.ue.ythin[ startsfiom the family, yet he wanrs to get away rrom it. He would like us tJ becomeo'e with the cosmos,breakout of the humdrum ofeverydaylire.But his method olreasoning cannor detach the subjectfrom the ramirialgrasp: thoughhe seesit only as the starting point, it cut.hes up wirh him ag-ainat e'ery turn' He tries ro resol'e the difficulty by taking refuge in rn .i.t..r,stylemeditation,but that cannot long withstand rhe intrulion of capitalist ; A d o u b i eb i n d i s a t w o i o r d ,c o n t r a d i c r o r yc o n s r r a i n to c c u r r i n gr n r h c c o m m u n i c a r i o n s between a p a t i e n ra n d h i s f a m i l v w h i c h c o n f u s e sh i m t o r a l l v .
54
Institutional Psvchotherapy
subjectivity u'hose methods are nothing if not subtle. He does not take Occlipus seriously enough: rvithout a frontal attack on this yital tool of one can make no decisivechangein the economyof capitaiist repressiot-i, C e s i r eo. r , t h e r e f o r et.h e s t a t u so f m a d n e s s concerned rt'ithfluxes- the flux of shit, of Nlary Barnes'sbook is constantl,v urine, ol'n-rilk,of paint - but, signifrcar]tlv,it barely mentions the flux of moltev. \te never discoverquite holv the set-upoperatesfrom this point of view. Who controlsthe money,who decideswhat to buy, who getspaid?The commur-rityseemsto live on air: \{ary's brother Peter,who is undoubtediy caught up in a lar deeperschizoprocessthan she is, cannotat first copewith t h e b o h e n r i a nl i l e s t y l e o f K i n g s l e v H a l l . I t i s t o o n o i s r ' ,t o o m e s s v ,a n d anvhow he wants to remain fit {br rvork. him - he nzustcome and live with her at Kingslev But his sisrertorr.Ilents Hall. Ht:rs is the unremitting proselytismof regression you'll see,You'll to the end of your you'll get paint, makelour journe1,,1ou'Il be able to He feelsno rvay. in a different is disturbing madness Peter's Bur madness. enthusiastnfor rushing into this sort oladventure. This nrav weli rellectthe dilferencebenveena real schizophrenicjournevand a lamilialist regression 'human along pett,vbourgeoislines. The schizois not so much attracted to warn)th'. His concernsare elsewhere,among the more de-territorialized fluxes- the flux of miracie-workingcosmicsigns,but aisoof monetarvsigns, T h r s c h i z ou n d e r s t a n drsh ev a l u eo f m o n e v- e v e ni f h e u s e si t i n c u r i o u sw a Y s -just as he understandsevervother realitl'.He doestrotplav at beinga baby. MLrneyis to hirn a means of rei'erencelke anv other, and he needs as manv refere.ce svstemsas he can get, precise\vin order !o preser'e his a\oolhess. For him, exchangeis a meansof avoiding interchange.In short, peter told them to buggeroirwith their interl-ering e'croachi'g conrmu'ity - he wanted no such threat to his particular relationshipto desire. N{ary'slamilialistneurosisis somethingvery d.ifferent: shervascontinually settingLrplittle farnilial territorialiries,in a kind of 'ampire greedlor ,human *'armth'. she attached herself to the other's image: fbr insrance,she had previouslyaskedAnna Freud to take her into anaiysis,but in lrer nrinclwhar that meant was that she and her brother would move in with Anna Freud and becomeher children. She set out to do rhe same thins with Ronnie and
Jo.. Familialism means magically denying the social realitv, avoiding all connectionwith real fiuxes.All that remains possibleis dreaming, and the e'ciosed hell of the conjugo-familialsystem.or even,in momenrsof jntense crisis,a iittle urine-soakedcornerto retreatto, alone.This was N'IaryBarnes's rnode of operation ar Kingslev Hall, as an apostleof Laingian therapv, a revolutionaryof madness,a professional. Her confessions teach us more than we would learn from readinga dozen
Mary Barnes,or Oedipus in Anti-psychiatry 55 textbooksol anti-psychiatry.In them we can see rrow the after-effects or' 'psychoanalysm' dog the methodsof Laine and his lriends. From the early Freud of studies onH2steria to the most up-to-datestructural analysts,all psychoanalyticalmethod always consistsin narrowing every situationdown by meansof threesilting processes: Interpretation:a thing must arwaysmean some!hingother than itself.The truth is neverto be lound in the direct experienceoffoices and relationships, but only byjuggling with cluesand significances; Familialism: rhose signilying clues can essentiallybe boiled do\4,n ro lamilial representations. To discover'*'hatthel are calls for a regression,in which the subject is led to 'rediscor.,er' his childhood. which means irr practicean 'impotentized'representationof childhood,a childhoodas memor1'arrdas rn1'th,childhoodas a refuge,as negatirlgthe intenseexperiences of the present.and thereforewith no possiblerelaiion to what the subject's childhoodwas really like in positiveterms; Transference:as the interpretativereductionand the familialistregression proceed,desireis re-esrablished in a drasticallvreducedspace,a mlserable little area of identification (rhe analyst's couch, his waiching eye, his supposedlv- attenti'e ear). since the rules ol the game demand that whateveris presentedmust be reducedto termsof interpietationand fatherand mother-inrages.all rhat remains is to reduce the signifying apparatus itself so that it only functionsin relation to a singleterm: the sitenceoltte analvst, against which ail questions come up against a blank wa[. The
psvchoanalyticar rransference, rikea kind oichurnior creamingoffth.r.dii, of desire'leavesthe patientdangring i. passion rvhich,thoughlessdangerous";;ig;;inothingness, a narcissistic thanRussianroulette, readsifsuccessful to thesamesortolirreuersibre fixationon unin",po.,"nt detailswhichends by'withdrawing him fromall other.o.iufinr..i_.rr,r. We havebeenawarefor a longti,n. tfrri-ifr... badlywith the mad:their.interiret;;;;;;l;;sestir...liting.processesr,r,ork are toodifrerentfrom theprevailingsocialcoordina,... n,ui^i rrrsri., nt,, instead of rejecting thismethod,theytriedto improve theprocesi, ii o.o.. ro makethem more tn:.itent interpretation of theanalyticiCte_a_tcte was :5::i:: replaced by a co'ectrve and noisv_ interpretarion, a kind of delirium ;;;;il;;:r: Certainli,themethodwuseflectiue,in "f ;';;';;y,'"" longermerely a kind of mirror-game berween thewordsof thepatientani th. ril.n.. of the analvst, it introduced objects,movemenrs and a certainbal;
g."u,,..g..,,ron;il:,:i:::ffi:,tJli:J:: +"ilil;'i;;"*', l..*f"l":g
Dernga c.ocodi.le,bit her, squeezed her, roted f,e, ^bout in her bed _ ar, of which an ordinary psychoanalyst *oufA'U.rnfit.fu ,o Oo. A breakrhrough,apparentlv _ they *,... on'iti
entirely n.* pru*i., anew semiotic, rrrl."g ^*"il#il:f:il:,ffi,l:
56
Institutional Psychotherapy
of'signihcanceand interpretation. But no. Each time, the psychoanalvst pulled himself togeth€ragain, and brought back the old lamilialistpoints of reference.And he becamethe prisonerof his ou'n game:whenJoe Berkehad to leave the house Marv did all she could to stop him. Not merelv was the analysisinterminable- the sessionbecameso as welll He had to display real anger in order to qet away liom his patientjust lor a lew hours, to attend a meetingon the Vietnant wal'. In the end, nothing escapedthe interpretativeinfection.Paradoxically,it w.asMar,v w ho was the first to break out of the circle- by her painting. In fact, within months she had become a well-known painter.EYet, even then, interpretationstill held swa,v:Mary lblt guiltv over attendingdrawing classes, becauseher mother's cherishedhobbl' was painting, and she would be reserltfuiif she iearnt that her daughterpainted bettertlran shedid. Nor r,r'as 'Now. with all thesepaintingsyou havethe penis, the paternalsideneglected: the power of the lamily. Your-father feelsvery threatened.' With touchingapplicatiorr,Mary setout to absorball the psvchoanalvtical claptrap. She stood out like a sore thumb in the comnrunitv atmosphereof' Kingslev Hall: she would not talk to just anyone.She refusedother people becauseshe wanted to be sure that whoeverwas caring for her was fully in accord with Ronnie's ideas.'When I got the idea of a breast,a safebreast, .Joe'sbreast,somewhereI could suck, yet not be stolen from myself,there was no holciingme . . . Joe. putting his finger in my mouth, was to me saving, stealing "Look, I can come into you but I'm not controllingyou, possessing, ' y o u ," ln the end, the psychoanalysthimself was overwhelmedby the inter'interpreted pretativemachinehe had helpedto setgoing.He admitsit: Marv everything that was done lor her (or for anyone else for that matter) as therapy .. . II'tlie coal was not deliveredwhen ordered,that was therapv. And so on, to the most absurd conciusions.'Butthis did not stopJoe Berke from continuing to strugglewith his orvn interpretations,whosesole object '. was to fit his relationship with Mary into the Oedipal triangle: . . By 1966. . . , I had a pretty good idea of what and s'ho I was lor her when we were together. "Mother" took the lead when she was Mary the baby. "Father'' and "brother Peter" vied for secondplace' In order to protect my own senseof realitv, and to help Mary break through her rveb of illusion, I always took the trouble to point out rvhen I thought lvlary was using me as someoneelse.'But he neverfound it possibleto unravel the web completely. N,laryhad got the whole householdcaught up in it. . ne could B . H e r e x h i b i t i o n s i,n C r e a t B r i t a i n a n d a b r o a d ,b r o u g h th e r a c o n s i d e r a b l cee l e b r i t y O say quite a lot about rhis kind ofrecovery via Art Bnl, which involves launching a mad artist upon the pu blic like a stagestar, firr the bene6tofthose who moun t the exhibi tions.The essenceofmad art is that it lalls outside ordinary conceptsofthe author and his or her work.
N{ary Barnes,or Oedipus in Anti-Psychiatry 57 If we look at rhe rechnique of regressioninro babyhood, and at the transference,we see that, as developedin a community, their tendencyto create 'de-realization'was greatlv multiplied. In the traditional analytical encounter)the one-to-onerelationship,the artificial and limited natureofthe w'ay the sessionis organizedestablishesa kind of barrier to hold back the excessesof the imagination. At Kingsley Hall, it was a real death that confrontedMary Barnesat the end of each of her Jour'eys', and the whole householdbecamecaught up in equally real grief and su{rering.So much so that Aaron Estersonwas driven back to the old methods of authority anci suggestion:N{arv was literally starving herselfto death, and he firmly ficrbade h e r t o c o n t i n u eh e r f a s t . Someyearsbelorehand,a catholic priesthad equally firmly forbiddenher to masturbate,telling her, so she said, that it was an evengraversin than to sleeprvith a boyfriend.This, too, was completelysuccessful. But, surely,this return to authority and suggestionis the inevitableaccompanimentof such a techniqueoftotal regression.Suddenly,sheis turned away from the very edge of death bv a 'policeman-father'materializing lrom the shadows. Tiie Imaginary, especiallythat of rhe psvchoanalvst, is no sort ofdefenceaqainst socialrepression:on tlie contraryJit unconsciouslyinvitesit. one of the most valuable lessonslrom this book is perhapsthat it shows horv illusory it is to seekto rediscoversheer,unmixed desirebv settineoffto find knots buried in the unconsciousor hidden cluesofi'terpritutionlTh... is no magical efrect whereby the transferencecan disentanelethe real micro-politicalconflicts thrt imprison people,no mystery, no other r'orld behind this one. There is nothing to discover in the unconscious:the unconscious hasstill to be consrrucred.Ifthe oedipus in the transference fails to resolvethe familial oedipus, it is becauseir remainsprofoundlyattachedto the lamilializedindividual. Alone on the couch or in a group, in a planned regression,the ,normalneurotic' (you and I) or the psychiatrist'sneuroric(who is 'mad') continues over and over again to demand the oedipus. psychoanalysts, whoseentire training and practice have filled them to rhe eyeballswith the reductionist drug olinterpretation, can do no other than reinlorcethis flattenins-outof desire:translerenceis a techniquefor dispracingthe investmenrsoidesi.e. Far lrom moderatingthe rush towardsdeath, it seemsactuallv to accelerate it, gatheringtogetherthe'individuated' oedipal energiesas in a cyclotron,in whatJoe Berke calls 'the vicious spiral of punishment-anger-guilt-punishment'. It can only lead to castration, renunciation and sublimation - a shoddykind ofasceticism.The objectsofcollectiveguilt succeedone another, accentuatingthe self-destructive, punitive impulsesby couplingthem with a realrepressioncomposedofanger,jealousyand fear. Guilt becomesa specificlorm of the libido - a capitalist Eros - when it
58
Institutional Psychotherapy
entersinto conjunctionwith the de-territorializedfluxesofcapitalism.It then findsa new u,ayout, a novelsolution,of the limitationsimposedby the familv, the mental hospital,psychoanalysis. I shouldn't havedoneit, what I did was wrong, and the more wrong I feelit to be, the more I want to do it, becauseit makesme exist in the intensityzoneof guilt. However,that zone,insteadof being cmbodied,linked to the body of the subject,his ego, his family, takes possession of the institution: fundamentally,the real bossat Kingsley Hall was Mary Barnes.And she knew it. Everything revolvedaround her. But whereasshewas onlv playing at Oedipus,the otherswere tied hand and foot in a collectiveOedipalism. One day.JoeBerkedescribesfinding her coveredin shit and sobbing:'You have to hand it to Mary. She is extraordinarily capable of conjuring up evervone'slavourite nightmare and embodying it for them.' At Kingsley Hall, then, the translerencewas no longer containedby the analyst- it was getting ar'va1,in all directions and becoming a threat even to the psychoanalysthimself. At that moment the ties of analvsiswere almost broken lbr good, and the desiring intensities,the 'partial objects',almost {bllowed their own lines of force and ceasedto be dogged by svstemsof interpretation as correctly codified b1' the social grids of the 'dominant reality'. Why did Berke make such a desperateattempt to reunire rhe scattered multiplicity of Nlary's 'experiment' with dissolvingher ego and attempt to Iet her neurosisbreakthrough?Why rhisreturn to the polesof the family, to the unity of the person, preventing N{ar1,from opening out to a whole social field outside herself which might have proved so rewarding? 'The initial processof her coming togetherwas akin to mv trying to put togethera jigsaw puzzlewithout having all the pieces.Of thosepieceswhich wereabout, many had had their tabs cut off and their slots barricaded.So it was nigh on impossible to tell what went where. The puzzle, of course, was Mary's emotional life. The piecesu,ereher thoughts,her actions,her associations, her dreams,etc.' How can it be proved that the solurionlor Mary Barnesreallv lay in the direction of an infantile regression?Or that the origin of her problems rose from disturbancesor blockagesin the communications svstemsof her family when shervasa child? Why not take a iook at what was going on elsewhere?In fact, it can be seenthat all the doors opening to the world outside were firmly shut against her when she tried to go through theml consequently,what she found outside was almost certainly a familialism even more repressivethan that of her childhood experience. Perhaps the unfortunate Mr and Mrs Barnes were only unconsciouslyreflecting the violent storm ofrepressionthat was going on outside. Mary had not become'fixated' at her childhood - she
Mary Barnes,or Oedipusin Anti-Psychiatry 5g had never lound the way outl Her desirefor a real wav out was too powerful, too demandingto yield to any externalcompromises. The first trouble started at school.'Schoolwas very dangerous.,She sar paralysed,terrified on her chair; shefought with her reacher.,Most thingsat schoolworried me . . .' She only pretendedro read, to sing,to draw - yet her desire was to be a writer, a journalist, a painter, a doctor. One day it was explainedto her that all this was a way of wishing she could be a man. ,I lelt ashamedthat I wanted to be a doctor. I know this shamewas bound up,- and here the interpretationismgets going - 'with the enormousguilt I had in connectionwith my desireto be a boy. Everythingmasculinein myselfmust be hidden. buried in secrer.' Priestsand policemenof everykind were usedto make her leelguilty about everything and nothing, and especiallyabout masturbating. When she becameresignedto being a nurserather than a doctor andjoined the army, it was yet another dead end. At one moment she wanted to go to Russia, becauseshe had heard that there,'women with babiesand no husbandswere quite accepted'.When she determined to enter the convent, there were doubts as to her religiousfaith: 'What broughr you into the Church?, No doubt the priestsrvereright - her wish for sanctity was suspect.Finally she ended up in the m.entalhospital, and even there she was prepared to do something, to dedilate herselfto others. One day she broughr a bunch of flowersto a sisterin the Nurses'Home, and heardherselfsaving,,you should not be herel' There seemedno end to the social traumas) the beating she received.Having becomea nurse) she was told she could not study for a higher qualification. From the first, what interestedMary Barneswas not the lamily - it was society.But everythingbrought her back to the family; sad to sav,evenher life at Kingsley Hall! since the lamilialistinrerprerationwas rhegame they liked playingthere,and sincesheloved them so much, shewas ready to play it with them. And how well she played it! The real analyst at Kingsley Hall was hersellrshe got the fullest mileageout ofall the neurotic possibilitiesofthe project,all the underlying paranoiaof her Kingsley Hall lather and mother, Indeed, Marv, the missionary,may well have contributed to helping the anti-psychiatriststo recognizethe reactionaryimplicationsoftheir psychoanalvticpostulates.
Money in the Analytic Exchange 6 r
Money in the Analytic Exchange'
Money lunctionsas a misleadingequivalent,in the sensethat the value that it representsor crystallizesdependson the positionone occupiesin the production system.To thosewielding power in a systembasedon the extractionof a surplus-valuemoney meanssomethingquite diflerentfrom what it meansto thosesellingtheir labour. It crystallizesboth a way of organizingexploitation and a svstemfor disguisingthe classstruggle.I t determinesnot only people's structuralpositionsu'ithin production,but alsothe natureofthe productions encodedin the system. The contentofthe capitalistencodinghas changedas and when there has beena reduction ofprofit leveisin a whole seriesofsectorsolproduction. The State has been forced to take over from private capitalism, in the system of national insuranceand pensions,for instance,in taking over directly the or in fieldswhere the preservationof a minimum of controlof public serwices, socialorder requiressuch institutionsas socialsecurity,a health service,etc. It is preciselythose productions that are not srictly part of the bi-polar relation of exploitation that becomein a sensedevalued,It goes without saying,for example,that the work that goesinto producingraw materialsor manufactured goods in an under-developedcountry is diflerent from the equivalentwork in a rich area.The samegoesfor the work in key sectorsol capitalist production as compared with work in slower sectors(like coal mining) or, worse still, work viewed as totally worthless(thejobs that give mental patientsor prisonerssomethingto do). We have tlrerefore to estimate what money represents in the analytic exchange - or, rather, pseudo-exchange,for there is no real exchange of services between analyst and analysand. There are two sorts of work inwork of volved: the anall,ticalwork of the patient, and the psychoanalvst's listening and sifting. It is actually quite wrong for there to be an,vffow of money from one to the other. In a diflerent social systemwhich viewed these two sortsof work in the sameway as any other form of production, the analyst and the analysand should both be paid, just as the social division of labour dictates that not only should factory work be paid, but work in ofEcesand r . In tervention at the Congressofthe Paris Freudian School heid in Aix-en-Provence,May I q7 r . Published in Leltresdt I'6colefreudieane,q.
researchlaboratoriesas well. One can hardly imagine unskiiied workers having to pay the designerswho plan rvhatthey producelBut ofcoursethis is all part ofthe systemofextractingthe surplus-value.When the psychoanalyst is paid, he is in fact reproducing a certain processolcrushing the patient to adapt him onto the personological polesofcapitalistsociety.How could it be otherwisewhen a psychoanalystseespatientswhose position in the family structurepreventstheir having any personalrole in the flux ofmoney - what Alain Cotta describesas the rotation of 'family capital'2- or directly taking part in the clcle of capitalist production (wives,for instance,who gointo analysiswhich their husbands pay for, or chi.ldren)?Unless there is some svstemoffunding out oftaxes and contributions,or an allorvancepaid by somethird bod,v,their analyticalproduction- which shouldin fact be classed as a u,ork ofeducation (in the widest sense)ofthe collectiveIabour force- is exploitedproduction. In the analyticalrelationship,the structuresofsocial alienation within the lamilv are transposedand reproduced:the lamily is usedas stagingpost. In as much as rhe psychoanalystfinds himselfhavingto be paid in this way, he is implicitly sanctioninga way of usingthe structuresof the lamily as an instrument to crush desireproduction and pressit into the serrice ola socialorder governedby profit. On the specificallyanalytic level,it seemsto me vital to recognizethat the child who draws or makesa plasticinemodel lor an analyst,and the wife who 'solve enters analvsis to the family's problems', are taking part in sociai production. At the unconsciouslevel, therefore,the capitalistextractionof sulplus-value is reproduced, and in a sense,expanded, in the analytic relationship.The claim of analysisto representa meansof gettingat the ruth shouldoblige it, first and foremost,ro denounceitself,for by the fact ofbeing paid for, it startsolla renewalofsocial violence. At the very least,ifthey carry on as they are, analystsshould be made to stopjustifyingtheir money relationshipwith their patienrson rhe groundsof somesupposed'svmbolicorder'. Or elsethey should acceptthe logic of their positionand stateclearly that, lor them, order itselfis the rightful basisof all systemsof segregation.In most cases.of course,they are unrvillingto go so far. Like any other capitalist,they believethat earning money is part of the normal order of things:'One has to earn a livingl'And, from an analyticpoint of view, this mav ultimately be the least dangerous, becausethe least mvstifving,attitude.
z. AIain Cotra, Thioie ginir ale du capital, dela craksanu et det futuatilu,
Dunod, r 966
Psychoanalysis and the StrugglesofDesire 63
Psychoanalysisand the Strugglesof Desirei
The problem facins the workers' revolutionarymovementis that there is a dislocationbetweenthe apparent relationsofpower at the level ofthe class struggleand the real desireinvestmentof the massof the people. Capitalism exploitsthe labour capacityof the working classand manipulatesthe relationsof production to its own advantage,but it also insinuates itself into the desire systemofthose it exploits.The revolutionarystruggle state ofpower cannot therelbre be restricted simpiv to the level oftbe apparent relations. It must extend to every level of the desiring economv that is contaminated bv capitalism (the individual, the couple, the family, the schr-,ol, the militant group, madness,prisons,homosexualityor rvhatever). The objectsand methodsof the strugglewill vary from onelevelto another. Sr"rchaims as 'Freedorn,Peaceand Plenty'dernand political organizations that can intervenein the power struggle,that combineforcesand constitute blocs. In the nature of thines theseorganizationsmust be representative, coordinatingthe struggleand providing it with a strategvand tactics.On the 'rnicroscopiclascism'other hand, the struegleagainstwhat we mav call the fascisrnimplanted within desiring machines- cannot be carried on 'u'ia delegatesor representatives. bv identifiableand unchangingblocs.The face ol' the enemy is changing all the time: it can be a tiiend, a colleague,a evenoneself.There is nevera time when you can be sureyou are not sr-rperior, going to fall for a politics supporting bureaucracy or privilege, into a paranoiac vieu' of the world, an unconsciouscollusionwith the establishment, an internalizationof socialrepression. These two strugglesneednot be mutually exclusir,e: - The classstn.rgsle,the revolutionarystrugglelor liberation,involvesthe existenceofwar machinescapableo1'standingup to the forcesofoppression, rvhich meansoperatingwith a degreeof centralism,with at leasta minimum of coordination; - The strugg.ie in relationto desirerequirescollectiveagenciesto producea continualiy ongoing analysis,and the subversionol eterltformofpower,at every level. t . Tal k eiven a t the fi rst Psrchoanalysisand Politics Conlerence,held in Ni ilan on 7-9 Mav r 973 a n d p u b l i s h e db y F e l t r i n e l l ia n d b y F d i t i o n s r o / r 8 ,
It is surely absurd to hope to overthrow the power ofthe bourgeoisie by replacingit with a structure that reconstitutes-thefomt of that piver. The classstrugglein Russia,china and ersewherehas demonstratei that, e'en after the power ofthe bourgeoisiehas been broken, the form ofthat power can be reproducedin the state, in the family, evenin ihe ranks or rhe revorution. How can we prevenr centrarizing and bureaucratic aurhoriry from taking charge of the coordination that is necessarilyinvor'ed in'organizing a revolutionary war? The struggle as a whole must include stageslnd int"er_ mediaries..A,tthe 'microscopic'revel,what must happen,first Jf ail, is a kind of direct changeoverto communism, rhe abolition of bourgeois po*e, in the sensethat that power is embodiedin the bureaucrat,the leader or the m i l i t a n td e d i c a t e dr e v o l u t i o n a r r ' . Bureaucraticcentralismhas teen introducedpermanentryinto the workers' movement in imitation of the centralist model of capitar. capitar supen'isesand o'er'encodes production by controlling the flowof money and wieiding coercivepolver over production relationsand in State monooolv capitalism.There is a similar problem with bureaucraticsocialism. But real productiondoesnot need this kind ofdirection in the least- in fact is better without. The major productivemachinesin indus*iar societies could manase very well without such centralism. Clearly, a different concepr of how productionis related boch to distribution and consumprion,and to training and research,would shatter the hierarchical and despoiicpowers that p.euaii within present-davproduction relations,and give i... piuy to the workers' capacitv for innovation. Evidently, then, the basis of centralism is not economicbut political. In the workers' movement,too, centrarism leads to the same sort of sterility. It must be acceptedthat lar more elrective and broader struggles could be coordinated a.r.",ayfrom bureaucratic headquarrers,but only ifthe desiring economyofthe workers can be freed from the contaminationof the bourgeoissubjectivitythat makesthem the unconsclousaccomplicesof the capitalist technocracyand the bureaucracy of the workerstmovement. Here we must be careful not to rail into the simplistic trap of saying either 'democratic' centralism,or anarchismand spontaneism. Alternative marginal movemenrs and communities have absolutelv nothin-gto gain by falling into the myth of a return to the pre-technologici age,of'back to nature'; on the contrary, they have to copewith .eal so.l.ty, real sexual and family relationships, with what is happening no*. On ti,. otherhand. one must recognizethat the officialworkers'movement has up to now relused to consider how far it mav be contaminated by bourgeois power, to consider its own internal corruption. Nor is there at present any scientific discipline that can help it to do so. Neither sociorogy,nor psycho-sociology, nor psychology- still lesspsvchoanalysis- has extlendedMarxism into this
64
Institutional PsYchotheraPY
nornrs area.Freuclianism,in the guiseola science,setsup as its unquestioned - the myth of a subjectivation bourgeois prodr.. rhat things verv the a signifving n...uru,-u castiatio,,oidesire, in terms of the Oedipal triangle'
Psychoanalysisand the StrugglesofDesire
65
abstract relation between individuals. No group, no class is made up of individuals; it is the imprint of capitalistproduction relationson rhe social dimensionof desirethat producesthe streamof undifrerentiatedindividuars necessaryin order to inveigle a work force. interpretatiorlwhichtendstoisolatetheanaiysis|romtherealitiesofitssocial Did the eventsolMay r 968 in Franceinrroducea potenrialchangeinto the settlng. ""J'uiua.a of centralism revolutionary technocratic the movement,specificallyon this point of the desir.ingeconomy? of abolishing to the possibility of understanding Had a different such a change taken place,it would have had considerablepoliticaland on rvould be based which capitaiistproduction, social consequencesl One can only say that, since the relative decline of betweenproduction, distribution and consumptionon the the relatir.rnship This would Stalinism,since the departure of a significantproportion of young workers one hanclatrclproduction, researchand educationon the other' the and studentslrom the traditional revolutionarymodels,we have witnessed obviousil,tenclto nrakea total changein attitudesto rvork,and especiallv socialh'useful (recognized as not a major break but little breakthroughsof desire,little breachesin the uselul as socially rvork recognizecl split betu,eeu o f d e s i r eA . ll despoticsystemthat prevailsin politicalorgarrizations. b y c a p i t a l i s mt,h a t i s , b i ' t h e r u l i n g c l a s s )a n d t h e ' u s e l e s s ' r v o r k of indiThe depredationsof N{ay '68 in Francewere repairedwithin a few weeks. of p.oductic,,t,whether ol commercialvalue or use value, llherher organizofsocial lorm ofa Perhaps controi no more than two. Nevertheless, the under is it had the most profound consebodies, viduals cir coliective disappearquences,and they are slill being felt at all sorts of levels.Even though its ation rhat enlbrcesa cerrainpatternofsocialdivisionoflabour.The resultsare no longervisibleon a nationalscale,it is still goingon by a kind of ance ol capitalisr centralism rvould thereforebring ivith it a fundamental developed highiv rvith infiltration in many differentsituations.A nervvision has beenborn, a nerv a societv in E'"en re-castinqof production techniclucs. c a r . o r ) e e t c . . e s s e r v i t approach to problemsof revolution.Before'68, for instance,it would have i n f o r n r a t i o n p u b l i c e l u p c d d e i i n d u s L r ; a r r c lh i g h l v to antagonlstlc be wotrld not been unthinkable that to suggestthat there could be any political purpose in relations production ot'diflbrent concen'e is campaigningin lavour of common criminals in prison; it would have been the productionsof desire,of art, of dreams ln other words, the question as unthinkablefor homosexu'als to demonstratein the streetsin defenceof their nuheihe.or not it is possibleto stop seeinguse value and exchangevalue olprodr-rcforms particular all complex orientation of rejecting desire. of The women'sliberationmovemenr,the fight aiternative ihe mutually opposeci. againstrepressionin psychiatry,theseand other movementshave acquired a return to ntlture merei;'reproducesthe split between tion and clenrancling of completelynervmeaningand methods.Thus it is true that problemsare now the difl'erenttorm, of production - desiring production and production seen diflerently, but, equally, there has been no real break. This is unutilitl . rect gnizcd s<-,cial doubted.lybecausethere is no large-scalemachine for revolutionary war. We x the rvay have to recognize that certain dominant images are still perpetrating their Relationsamong individuals,groups and classesare bound up "vith destructivee{rectse'en within revolutionarygroupsthemselves. A critique of individualsare manipulatedby the capitalistsystem-Individuals as such are bureaucratismin the trade unions has been begun; the principle of the manufacturedbv that sr-stemto satisf) the demandsof its mode of produc'delegation of power' to the vanguard, and the system of a ,drive belt' tion. The idea that rherewere originally,as the basisof society.individuals, connecting the people to rhe part)', rhesethings have been brought into groupSofiridir,idtra,lsinthe|ornro||amiliesandsoonwasthoughtup|orthe that has question.But revolutionariesare still the victims of a great many of the i..a, oL the capitalist sysrenl.In the human sciences,everything serves prejudicesofbourgeoismoralitv, and ofrepressiveattitudestowardsdesire. beenbuih up aiound the individual and the primacy ofthe individual context. his social and This may perhapsexplain the lact that in May '68 therewasno suchattackon individual rhe between dichotomy the extend to only rvith an1' to grapple psychoanalysis one tries as there was on psychiatry. Psychoanalysispreservedsome The ciilhcultvone comesup against,the moment any real authorityin so lar as a number of the dogmasof psychoanalysis weretakenon sociairealitrl- be it language, madnessor anything connectedr.r'ith boardby the movement production- is that one is neverdealingwith individuals processo1'ciesiring 'Ir. * u. *u.h as linguistics,for instance,has beensatisfiedto defineits field irr The real breakthrough will only happen once there is a new approach to such termsof communicationamong individuals,it has totalll,missedthe coerciye problemsas the bureaucratismof organizations,the repressiveattitude of and integrativefunctionsoflanguage.Linguisticsonlv startsto liee itselffrom connotation, from arising revolutionary men towards their wives and children and their lailure to problems tlie it studies when ideoi'g.v bourgeois understandthe significanceoffatigue, neurosisand delusion (it is quite usual context.the implicit and all the transactionsof languagethat lall outsidethis
66
Psychoanalysisand the StrugglesofDesire
Institutional PsYchotheraPY
'breaksdown' to be dismissedas 'finished"asof no more use lor someole who -once suchproblernsare)not to the organizationifnot a positivedangerto it) but at leasttreatedwith Concerns) political o|their pe,hupsut the very centre the stand that must be or problems, as organizational scriousness the same police The battle is the powerr or management,or rrracleagainstbor-rrgeois our otvn internal against ranks, own our one tha; Intlst be fought within have contended'a Nlaoists as certain front, secorldary a police.It is notjust a dichotsrppo.ting action.'amarginal operatiorl'As long as there remains ofdesire. front the on battle o-y.b.,.u..n the battle on the classlront and the '68, most after \{a,v Significantly, possible. be all ibrms o1'.r-optionrvill still n'eaklink that revolutionar.vmovementslailed to graspthe importanceof the had becomeapparentduring the studentstruggle Quite suddenly'students ,lorgot' the respectthat wasdue to the superiorknowledge and young u,oikers from the old und po*J, oiteachers,io..*.n, managers.etc They brokeaway new approach' entirely an introduced and the past of values the to submissic.rn But the u,holething was labeliedspontaneism,in orher u'ords a transitional 'superior'phase,marked b1'the manifestationthat must be left bel'rindfor a the people;it setting-Lrpofcentralistorganizations.Desiresurgedup among that *,u, n[,.i, but expectedto quietenand acceptdiscipline No one realized further all from inseparable this new form of revolt would in future be economicand political struggles' way in when I tark o['x{arxismand Freudianlr*. I huu. in mind a particular olview, point one From are treated. rvhich the texts oflv{arx and Freud all its Freudianisrr must be defined as reactionaryin all its socialstar-rces, while even lamily' the and individual the between relations of analyses problems Marxism remains generally inadequate in its treatment of the
67
lull-time revolutionaryor a doctor,activitv in one'slamilv, one'smarriageor any other situation. It is perhaps conceivable,if circumstanceswere different, that we could start talking seriousl,vofthe relation betweena politics ofdesire and a politics ofrevolution,but only ifwe werepreparedto be totally honest,and ifneed be, tread on somepeople'stoes. to stressthe A number ofpeople have intervenedduring thesediscussions view that the principal dilemma facing us in our particular field is that 'alternativepsychiatry' and a psychiatric betweena (reformist) politics of politics that is revolutionaryfrom the word go. This would mean that there were t$'o camps: on the one side would be Jervis2 and on the other such experiences as the SPK.' But the problem is not really so simple.The conflict that lacesus in trving to contemplatea politics of desirecannot be restrictedto a singlefront; it is c, G. J ervis is an l talian psychiarist, author ofa cri tical handbook on psvchiatry' 3. A socialist patients' collective in Heidelberg. The SPK was made up oftherapeutic groups comprising some lorty patients at the Polyclinic ofHeidelberg University. These patients,and their doctor. Dr Huber, carried out a thtoretical and practical critique ofthe institution, and discloscd the ideoiogical function ofpslchiatry as an instrument ofoppression. Their work soon attmcted 'a increasing opposition from rhe psychiatric cl i nic - i ts di rector d escribed the group as collective of hatred and aggression'. As repressionintensified,so did resistance.It becameimpossible to get rid ofthe SPK by o{ficial and iegal means. I n a secretsession,the Univcnity Senatedecided to call in the police.They found a pretext inJ ul,v r 97 r , when there was an exchangeofgunfire in the subu rbs of Heidelberg.This was biamedon the S P K, which could then be put down in the most brutal way. Three hundred copswith suImachine guns lorced their way into the SPK premiscs, helicopters flew over the city, thc (special brigades) were nrobilized, searcheswere made with no wanant, Dr Bundesgrenqschut7 Huber's children taken as hostages,parients and doctors were arrested, and the accused were drugged ro make them appear cooperative.The SPK thereupon decided to disband.
relatedtodesire.Thisdoesnotmeanjhowever,th:rtthereisnomoretobe Dr Huber and his wife spent some years in prison, in an almost total isolation which even ajudge said about rhe textsofFreud and i\{arx' describedas inhuman, By treating them first as insane and then as terrorists (becauseof their T h e q u e s r i o n i s j u s t i v h a t u s e t o m a k e o | t h e m . A s w i t h e v e r v t h e o r y , t h e r e raponse to police provocation they were compared with the Baader-Meinhofgroup), they could be as a meansof brought beforea special tribunal opemting on Nazi principles. are two;ays in which they could be used The text can be used links betweenone the The defencewas paralysed. One ofthe lar.yers, Eberhardt Becker, was accusedofcomplicity, connections, social real identifying and illumir.rating and charged. -Another,Jorg Lang, was imprisoned. All the lawy'erswho supportcd them were to tailor as wa-v a such in be used can the theory or next; the .r.rggi. and harassedand removed by one means or another. Lawyers were appointed who only saw the r e a l i t yt o f i t t h e t e x t documentsin the casea lorrnight before it opened,wherero the press had had them from the fint. relation-ship the explain to they try r.r'hen People are often verv dogmatic The accused rejected their serviccs. way out of this On 7 November r g7z, the day the trial opened in Karlsruhe, the three accusedwere brought in on betw"en lr{arxism and Freudianism.I believethat the only sretchers (two between the threeofthem), tied hand and foot. The Hubers, who had not seenone blindalle-vliesintalkingashonestl.vaspossibleabouttherealityofthe anotherlor fifteen months, were bullied and violently separated,and finally expelledfrom the court, conflicts- but they must be e{Iectiveconflicts' AslongaSwepreserveacleardir,iding.linebetw.eenprivateli|eand.public and ciass life, we ihull g.t nowhere. To clariiy political commitmenrs massof words' requires a in oneself burying merely *ithout commitments, discussionattheler,elofone'sday-to-dayactir,'ity,beittheactivityofa
alongwith Hausner, the third defendant. Halfofthose prment werc plain-clothespolicemen.Part of the rest wcre also expelledafter one young man read out a statemcnt ofinternational solidaritv wi th
theaccuscd.He, even beforc he had got outside the court building, was anested, abused,beaten up and left without medical attention for hours, A medical certificatelater issuedbv Karlsruhe hosoital describedseveredamage, some to the skull.
68
Institutional PsychotheraPY
not iust a rnatterof capitalismversusthe working class.I believethat a mass ofnew fronts will have to be openedas the working classand the organizations of the workers, movement become contaminated by the subjectivity of 'going out to the workers' and quoting the ruling class.It needsmore than influencein the sphereof rid oneselfofbourgeois to right authors {iorn the desire.In this sense,one cannot (asJervishas) identify the statedinterestsof the u,orkerswith their desire. The interestsof the Americanworking class,lor instance,may be objectivelyfascistin tendencylrom the point ofview ofthe politicsof desire.T!e unions'fight to defendthe workers'interests,legitimate though it be, can alsobe totally repressivein relation to the desire6fa whole seriesofother socialgroups,ethnicand sexualminorities,and soon. I belieye, lcrr exampie, that u'e must not delude ourselvesas to the possibility of a politicalalliancebetweenthe psychoanalyticvanguardu'ho claim to havegot rid 6f psychiatricrepression,and the working-classorganizationsthat exist as today. The modelsofrepressionare as unpleasantamong psychoanalysts leave the is not to class working the To go among militants. political among hospital. psychiarrichospitalbut merely'toentera differentsort of ps,vchiatric I spentover ten yearsworking in the FrenchCommunist Party, and that too was a kind ofpsychiatrichospital.I do not think one can go merelyby slogans ancispeechesand written texts if one is to judge whether or not a position is truly revolutionaryfrom the point ofview ofdesire The theoreticalwritings of the SPK, for instance,make exceptionalll' dogmaticreading,vet their politicsweregenuinelyrevolutionary'What they did shows the way to rvhat might be truly neighbourhoodpolitics, an emergentpoliticsof a masskind. However,the SPK was in no sensea party forrned on the basisof a programme of how to conduct the struggle.Only desiresserveto clarify the during rhe struggiedid the investmentofsuccessive aims and merhodsof the conflict.The SPK's politicsmightjust as easilyhave been those of an alternative psychiatr;'- not in the senseof anv reformist compromise,but as an alternativebasedon the realitiesof power' At present,in a very poor district of New York, the South Bronx, black ano Puerto Rican groups are running a drug addiction unit in Lincoln Hospital. Thus a popular movementhas takenover the fight againstdrug-dependence' This is also a lorm of alternativepolitics,sincethis mo\rementhas replaced rhe drug programmeof the Governor of New York State.Doctors no longer come into the unit, but remain outsideand are called upon only for professional advice. The unit has its own police force, and the fact that the governmentdoesnot closeit or ban it, and indeedactuailv goesso lar as to subsidizeit, is becausethe activistswho organize it are supported by the blacks and Puerto Ricans, and all the local gangs. In this case, then, an alternarivepolitics is a possibilitybecauseit is basedon real revolutionary conflict.But, equallv,it could be an illusion to seekto politicizepsychiatryif
Psychoanalysisand the StrugglesofDesire
69
the political action undertaken in the effort remains tied to traditional repressir.'e attitudes to madnessand desire. Could psychoanalysisbecome a force lor progress, could it develop into a 'people'spsychoanalysis'? It bearsthe stamp ofthe psychoanalysr's training as a privileged casteas much as it ever did. The essenceofpsychoanalysisis still that it is a taughtdiscipline,initiation into the psychoanalyticcasre.Even if a psychoanalystwants to behavelike'ordinary people',he is still a member of that caste; even if he is not preaching his concept of the proper relation betweendesireand society,he is still re-enacringrhe samerepressive politics in his practice.The problem, therefore,is not that his ideasare more or less wrong, but that his whole way ofworking reproducesthe essenceofbourgeois subjectivity.A man who sits on his chair listening to what you say, but systematicallydistanceshimselflrom what it is all about, doesnot evenhave to try to impose his ideason you: he is creating a relationship of power which leadsyou to coicentrate your desiring energyoutside the social territory. Nor - it is only more marked here is this somethingpeculiar to psychoanalysts than in the other professions of socialcontrol.We find it in the teacheron his rostrum,the overseerbehind his glasspartition, the army ofEcer,the cop, the psychologist with his batteriesoftests,the psychiatristin his bin, etc.,etc.All of them individually may well be very nice people. They may well do everything they can to help those they deal with, yet lor all their good will eachis contributing in his own way to condemningindividualsto loneliness and extinguishingtheir desire.Of courseeveryattemptis madeto cushionthe repression:with modern teaching methods, for instance, they try to ensure that no child feelsat sea in a huge class,no child is terrorized by the teacher. The psychoanalyst,too, tries to make his techniquegentler- and ultimately more insidious.He de-gutsand neutralizeseverythinghis patientstell him, thusadministeringa kind of subjectivitydrug. And who is to blame him for that?Ifwe are not going to condemn the drugs used byjunkies, why should we condemn the sort people go to psychoanalystsfor? That is not the point. Everyonedoes his own thing as well as he can, and each in his own way plays a supporting role as policeman - as father in the family, as male chauvinist in thecouple,as child-t1'rantand so on. Nothing is gained by issuingcondemnations,by anathematizingthe behaviourof this personor thar.What mattersis to prevent the workers' movement from being contaminated by the ideology and modesofsubjectivation of bourgeoisauthority, The fact that a few people are trying to introduce 'psychoanalysisfor the people'is not in itselfvery serious.What is serious,on the orher hand, is that thosewho direct the workers' movement, parties, trade unions, small left groupuscules,are carrying on in their own way just like teachers,or - ultimately,just like policemen.Fighting lor betterpay and psychoanalysts
7o
Institutional PsYchotheraPY
class are the conditions is not the be-all and end-all. The working -pnme There is indeed a desire' victims of capitalist techniquesto manipulate problem cannot be problem of sufleringamong ihe working class,but that the love-livesof the (sport, TV' kind otarugrlot*natever resoluedby the use possibilityof a remedy' fu*ou., t(e Party mystiq"ue,or whatever)'The only i s l b r t h e o r g"problem anizationo|theworkers'movementitselftotakecontrol of how to liberate desire- and to do so without any of the whole and help from psychoanalysts,without itself becoming a psychoanall'st' alienating and repressive without resortlng to any of the psychoanalyst's techniques. Themostcommonfeature(wherebywecarrrecognizethe.Oedipusmethod,) can be fitted is a certain technique ofreductive representation. EuerLsituztton triangular apparently in an into a systemofrepresentationthat is expressed 'apparently', becausesuch a systemoperateslar more along a -od.. i say reducedto a singleterm, binar.ymoje, and indeedconstantlytendsro become 'black-hole'eflect' or to vanish altogetherin what I rvould cali a lnthebeginni-ng,awholeseriesofambiguous,ambivalentnotionsmadeit possible|or"Freudianismtooperatequiteunlikeamethodclosedinupon and caused itself.But its centraldiscoveries,all that gave utteranceto desire place to not the is This lost. such scandalat the time, have sincethen been of history the fact in is which closing-in trace the history of that developstructuralist recent most its excluding not itself, psvchoanalvsis ments. of the unconscious.lt I will take one example:its attitude to the processes no more involved they that not dialectical, were recognizedat first thatihese ,n.guiio., than they did the negationof negation..Theunconsciousis wholly by poliriu., a machine of fluxesand i'tensities not determinedor controlled the But.by psychoanallsis' it by onto ih..,ur,..n, of representationprojected into it intermediarv of the transferince, psychoanalysishas introduced as a treated are and iack. The intensitiesof dreams,lor instance, negativeness their interpretation, and kirid of raw material. By the technique olassociation caught manifestexpressionis re-written in terms of fundamentalstructure. - that of the manifestcontentand that structuring of modes two the between all possible o{'the later-rtcontent - desire finds its lines of escapecut offfrom of interpretation psychoanalyst's connection with reality Ultimateiy the oedipus the of coordinates the social into them dreams consistsin fitting is threaten. complex. To take another example, perhaps even ciearer:a child 'Baptiste,I'm going to cut o{fyour head'' W.ho ing his little brother, shouting. the real child? iril'? Who is the speakerlWirat evidenceleadsus to say it is AndthesamewithBaptiste'Ifwetaketheuseo|theChristiannameaS we make referring to a real child, ther"rwe make the child using it responsible:
Psychoanalysisand the StrugglesofDesire
7r
him the potential murderer of his brother, But was it really his brother as such, that particular member of his family, that he meant? Clearly, the intensitiesof desire must be linked to normally acceptedsystemsof representation,but encounterslike this can lead in two directions,can express two sorts of politics. The first will use them as so many sign machines for expressingintensitiesof everykind. The small child says,'I'm going to cut off mv brother's head.' And he at once switchesto a totally di{Ierentplan - he might perhapsdecideto go offto rhe moon with him. We then discoverthat his hared for his brother is coextensivewith his love lor him. But this is not really a 'discovery'at all. The hatred was not'masking' the Iove. It isjust that a new connectionhas produced a new possibility.The hatred rvhen diflerently 'driven'has producedlove. The unconsciousholds nothing that can be denied,nothing ofwhich one can say later that it caused the personto feelambivalent.It has not changedits mind, but merelypassed on to somethingelse.It is thus nonsenseto say that the child is polymorphouslv perverse,etc. Pulling the headoffone'sdoll, wanting to strokeone's mother's tummy - theseare not things that can properly be related to the 'whole objects'of acceptedlogic.They do not involvethe child's responsibility as such. The repressiveanalytic attitude, founded upon 'normalized' representations, will systematicallytake him at his word, and reify what he hassaid: 'He wanted to kill his brother,he desireshis mother,he meanswhat he says.he is incestuous.'All the agentsof the story- the child, the brother and the mother - will then becomefixed in the domain of representation.If you say to a child: 'You've brokenthe headoffyour doll - and you know quite well that it cost us a lot to buy it lor you!', then you are lorcing her into the systemof economicvalues,so that gradually all her objectswill be seenin relation to the categoriesof the prevailing reality, the prevailing order. All of reality then becomesimprisonedin the schemaof dualist values- good/evil, expensive/inexpensive, rich/poor, uselul/useless and so on. The unconscious,however,despiteits rejectionofnegativityand ofall the dualistsystemsrelatedto it, despiteits ignoranceof loveor hatred,or what is commandedor what forbidden,is led to make its own kind of investigationof this crazy world of acceptedvalues.It dealswith the problemsas bestit can. It sneaksaround them. It sets up the leading characterson the domestic scene,the representatives of the law, like so many grimacingpuppets. But it is primarily in the directionof this world of socialrepresentations that we must obviouslv look lor the intrinsic perversionofthat system. Psychoanalvsishas not managed to escapethis perversion of the normal world. From the very first, it sought to control desire. The unconscious always appeared to it something bestial and dangerous. None of the successivelormulations of Freud has ever abandoned this position.-Libidinal energ"ymust be converted to the Manichean svstem of accepted values, it must produce normal
72
Institutional Psychotherapy
r.presentations.There could be no questionol enjo;ring shitting in your bed wrthout an accompanyingfeelingof guilt. From intensitiesthat might meanmanv things,we havethus cometo invest punitive socialvalueswith the promotion of the castrationcomplex.In point offact, the closing-inofpsychoanalysisupon the Oedipal trianglerepresents a kind of attempt to escapefronr that drive to abolish desire that leads it ahnost in spite of itself towards this binary, \,{anicheanperversion.The Oedipus schemawas constructedas a barrier to narcissism,to destructive late olthe instincts.But the identifications.It seemedto representa necessary death instinctcomesinto beingonly at the point rvhenone leavesthe sphereof desiring intensitiesfor that of representation.The Oedipal triangle is an * to stop the descentinto the death attempt- alw,aysmore or lessur-rsuccessful instinct.It neverreally works as a trianglebecausedeath,symbolicabolition, libidinal collapse, threatens all three sides of it. In the theatre of the psvchoanalyticGrand Guignol, thereis alwaysan unhappy ending.Between lather and child is the risk olreciprocal extermination(the Oedipal murder thntasy is paralleled b-u.' the fantasy that a child is being beaten).Between lather and mother is the 'primal scene'of intercourse,experiencedby the child as murder. Betrveenmother and child is the imminent danger of narcissisticdissolution,return to the womb, etc.- in other words,of suicide. schizo-analvticpolitics In short, I should say that, unlike psvchoanalvsis, would be led to considerthat the death instinctis nor somethingthat existsin itself,but that it is linked with a certainway ofposing the problemofdesirein a certain n,pe of society. Desire is unaware of death, of negation,and the tragediesof the lamilialist Grand Guignol strikeit asfunny. Sincenegationis always related to the position ofa subject,an object and a relerencepoint, desire, being purely and intensivelypositive,changesround subjectsand objects;it is fltix and intensity. In so far as the subjectis bound up with a svstemolrepresentation,the individual libido finds itselfdependenton the capitalist rnachinewhich forcesit to function in terms of a communication basedon dualist systems.The socialenvironmentis not made up of objects u'hich pre-existedthe individual. The person imprisoned in such bi-polar life/death,etc. has systemsas man/rvoman,childiadult, genital/pre-genital, to an Oedipalizingreductionofdesire to representaalready beensub.jected tion. For desireto be expressedin individual terms meansthat it is alreadv condemnedto castration.There existsa totaliv di{Ierentnotion: the idea of a collectiveforce,a collectivedirectionoflibido to parts ofthe body, groupsof constellations and intensities,machinesof everykind individr-rals, of ob.jects tiius bringing desireout of that back-and-forthbetweenthe Oedipal triangle and its dissolutionin the death instinct, and linking it up u'ith ever-wider possibilitiesof many diflerentkinds that becomeever more open to the social environment.
The Role of the Signifier in the Institutionl
I am using Hjelmslev'scategorieshere solel,vin an attempt to identily the position of the signifier in the institution - a position that the classical analyticalsituation did not reveal.We may remember that the distinction betu'eenexpressionand content is overlaid by a triple division into matter, substanceand 1brm. I shall be mainh'concerned wirh the opposition he establishesbenveenmatter (the matter both ol the expressionand of the content)and the formation of semioticsubstances. !\'hat I lvant to show here is that the semiologies olsignificationoperatein thefour areaswhere expressionand contentare cut acrossby substanceand lorm, wher-easthe semiotics \{e are conlronted with in an institutional situationinvolve nvo further dimensionsof a-semioticallyformed matter thatis, meaningas the material of expression, and the continuum of material fluxesas the materialof content.Thus the six areassho,,vnin the diaeram are a l l a c t i v e hi n, v o l v e d . ' tornredsubstanc€s somiotioally substance
maltar
i
form
a-si9nifyinq ssmioticp ot exo16ssion of content
ffi \
-s] "y?
a-Bomiotic 6ncodings
F o r H j e l r n s l e r ,a, s u b s t a n c ei s s e m i o t i c a l l l ' l o r m e d when its lorm is proj e c t e do n t o m a t t e r o r m e a n i n g ' a s a n e t t h a t i s s t r e t c h e do u t p r o j e c t si t s shadorvolrto an unbroken surlace'(cl. Prolegontines). As rveknou', signi{iing chainssetgoing.at the ler"elofthe substanceofexpression,a limited rangeol r l - a l k s i l c n a t t h e P a r i s F r e u d i a n S c h o o l h c l d i n I - a M o t t e , N o v e m b e r r g 7 j . P u b l i s h e di n Snniotex!.
71
Institutional Ps.vchotherapl'
composition is siqns - discretizecland digitalized signs rvhoseformal to me that Il seems contents. signified of their {.:on3o,n..1 to the fbrmalizarion distinction Hjelmsler"s in assimilating over-hastv ha,;e been the linguists distinction between the betrveenexpressicinilrrd content rvith Saussure',s the separation betweeu of.fact, point signifier and what is signified. In substances,to the formed senrioticallv and mltter lormed a-semiotically independentlv of the relationship betrveen exterrt th;rt it is estaLtlishecl ol expressloiland conten[,opensthe wa)' to a study ofsemioticsindependent zol preciseil'' which are miotics se ' to sav, that is serniologies the si.e;nitving careful not to basei ort the bi-pc-,larityof signilier and signified' Bv being brought to n'e are coniuseinstirutionalsemioticswith signitiing semiotics' call I lvhat fiom both riistinguishone liorr the other, ancl to separate "r'ill n o n - s e m i o t iecn c o d i n g s . 2 Let me onceagain summarizemy suggestedclassification code' or any ger:etic the is (r\.:'v-on-.vemiotic example of these cncodings..\n of the independently functions u'hich encoding, ()i'r,ltat u,e cail natural ti,pe the forrnaiize code oi lorms These substance. semiotic of any {:nnstitutior arena-oi'inaterialintensitiesrvithoutrecourseto any autonomousor translatprojecting 2[]s 6erieoiinscription' One must avoid tlre semioticmistakeof ,inscription'onto the world of nature.There is no genetic t h e i c l r : ao f ,hanciwriting'.']'hesecondverticalcolumn of our table is not involved.3 These are based upon systemsof signs' on sub(ti Signifiing semiologies. on the srancesloim".l semioticallyand ha'ing a relationshipof lormalization - svmbolic kinds trvo of are The-v expression and of of cotrtent plane l,-c,th and semiologiesof sienification serniologies substancernto play rcmioiogieri ,.1 S-lmhottc " These bring various t,vpesof olgesture . of mime, of semiorics are thete instancr. l,-,p.imiti"e societieslfor ofthe creation The so on' aud ofritual body, the on inscriptions o{ p,ruru.., i,rorld'of childhood or the'world'ol'madness also brings into plav several into any non-centred semiotic circles that can never be fully translated preserve will therefore substances semiotic ofsignification. universalsystem r)'pe of specific to a corresponds that territoriality autonornous certain a jr,uis.sance,a lt r . I n s u c r : t r : c i i r q s e c r i o n s w e s h ab lel r e t u r n i n g m a n y t i m e s ! o t h i s a t t c m p t t o c i a s s i f v e n c o d i n g s t h i s c l a s s i h c a t i oonu t . r r a si n i a c l d u r i i l g r h er v r i t i r g o f t h e s ev a r i o u sa r t i c l e st h a t I g r a d u a l l vu ' o r k e d 'rhich I initialiv and orlr' ,irtc,, ihen hut" I been abie to unifv the various viewpoins from it approachcd '3. those of form and lVhether there are in non-semioric encodings strata that correspond to complex certaini'v conteni i. a {tueslion llt unnot go illto here Ler us say merely that therc "r s,vstemsolar!icuiation in genctic coc{es, ; Ajol'thatgrasirsoneisbeing(specificallvusedtohringoutthesenseofgraspinginrelationto trritorialitv t.
The Role of the Signifierin the Insritution 75 (b) semialogies of signifuation.on the other hand. all their subsrancesof e x p r e s s i o n( o f s o u n d .s i g h t a n d s o o n ) a r e c e n t r e du p o n a s i n s l es i g n i f v i n g s u b s r a n c eT. h i s i s r h e d i c t a r o r s h i po { ' r h e s i g n i h e r ' .t n u r , . F . r . n i ; i : ; ; stance can be consideredas a written arche-.,vriting,but not in Derrida's sense:it is not a matter of a script that engendersall semioticorganization, but of the appearance- datable in history - of writing machinesas a basic t o o If o r t h e g r e a td e s p o r i ce m p i r e s . writing machinesare essenriallylinked to the setting-upof state power machines. The monrent they are there, ail oth€r poly-centredsemiotic subsrancesbecomedependentupon a singlespecificstratum ofthe signifier. The totalitarian narure of that dependenceis such rhat, by a tremindous retroactiveefrort,it seemsto make all semioticsoriginatefrom the signifier. The efrect of the written word in the unconscious is from thenleficrth fundamental- not becauseit relatesback to an archetvpalw,rittenlanguage. but becauseit manifeststhe permanenceof a despoticsignificancewhich, though arising out of particular historical conditions, can none the less continueto developand extendits effectsinto other conditions. (3) tl-signi.,iingsemiotics, These must be distinguished from semiologiesof' signification;rhev are, in a rvord, post-signifvingsemiotics.An instanceof a non-signifyingsemioticwould be a marhemaricalsign machinenor intended to produce significations;others would be a technico-semiotic complexus, which could be scientific, economic, musical or artisric, or perhaps an a.alytic revolutionarymachine.These a-signifyinsmachinesremain tased on sig'ifying semiotics,but no longer use them as anyrhing but a tool, an instrumenrof semioticde-territorialization,making it possiblefor the semlotic fluxesto lorm new connectionswith the most de-territorialized-material fluxes.Such connectionsoperateindependentl;'ofwhetheror not thel,sigrrif,v any'thingto anybody. In a sense,Benv6nisteis right to say that a// semiotic.s depend lor their beine on a signifyinglanguage.But the dependenceis not such as to involve any relationshipofsuperiority or subjection.A theory in physicsor chemistryneedsevokeno mental representationolthe atom or of electricity,even though it still has to be expressedin a languageofsignifications and images. It cannot do without props of this kind, but what it is essentialiybringing inro operation is a certain kind of sign machine that servesto support the absrractmachineson r'hich the lorcesolexperimental and theoretical complexesare based. we get to a point w.hereeven the distinctionberrveena siqn machine and a technico-scientific machine is no ionger relevant;the discoveryof a new tvpe of chemicalchain, or a microphvsicalparticleis, in somesense,pre-ordainedbl.a semioticproductionthat will determinenot on.lvits spatio-temporalspecifications, but alsoits conditions of existence.Thus, with non-signifvingsemiotics,it is the reciprocal
76 InstitutiorralPsychotherapy relationshipsof production and generationbetweenthe semiotic machine and the rlate riai tluxesthat are being radica.llvaltercd' in other of representation, The signifyingmachinewas basedon the s.vstem ,ords oi-, a productio' of semiotic redundancl' that created a world oi of images,analoguesand schematain placeof real intensities quasi-obiecrs, uno muitipticities.The signifyinge{Iectproducedbv the conjunctionof the a two forn,,ilir,,rs* of the signifier and the signified was thus caught in veritable vicior.iscircie, with the semiotic fluxes atld the material fluxes neutralizingeachorher in the sphereofrepresentation.A rvorldofdominant out of the signilying re-te;ritorializationsthat signi6catioriwas establisheci resulredfrom the, as it rr,ere, self-mutilationolthe semioticmachineseffected ol. by their being cenrredsolely on the signifying machine that machine autonomous an on functioned The signifier illusion anil impotentization. referringback to itself,*'hile realitv was to be stratllm olits own, ceaseiessly ibun,l a iong rvavarvaylrorn the semioticfiuxes.An individuatedsubjectivitv 'a emergeclironr the rvorkingsof that signifvingm;rchine;iD Lacan'sphrase' signifier icpresentsthe subject for another signifier'. It rva.san ambiguotts, divicledsutrjectivitv:in its unconsciousaspectit took part in a processol semiotic de-territorializationthat $,'asat work in the linguistic machines, prcpariug thenl to become a-signi$,ingsemiotic machines,"r'hcreasin its aspectit u,asbaseclon rhe re-territorializationolsignificanceand "on..io". interpretation. 'I'his positiL.nof the subject changesradically rn'hena-signifuingsemiotics comc ro tlre forefront. The u,orld of rnental representation(u'hich Frege or'reference'(at the peakofogden and contrasisrvith conceptsand ob.iects) Richards's tr.iangle,swhich is interposed between the symbol and the referent) then no longer functions to centre and over-encodesemiotics Signsare involved in things prior to representation.Signs and things engageone nnorher inclependentlyof the subjectivecontrol rhat agentsol individual utteranceclaim to have over them. A collectiveagenc)/ofutter'anceis then in a positionto deprivethe spoken w1rrclol its {Lnctionas inraginarysupPortio the cosmos.It replacesit with a collectivevoice thar combines machinic elementsof all kinds human, by a utterance of semlotic,technologicai,scientific,etc. The illusion specific side-e{Iect a merely having been as can seen be human subjectuu.ri.h.u,and pfoduced and manipulated by political and economic oi the sre,ternenis systems. I r is gerrerallythought that children, the mad and the primitive are forced (ges,o .*pi.r. thenrselvesthroughthe rnedium ol'second-le'el' semiotics of a masterv the to no access have they because tr,res, c.i,,, and so on) q Ch. OgJtn ancl l, r\. RicharCs, TheMeantngafMecring, London' tq:3'
The Role of the Signifierin the Institution
77
signilyingsemiotic.what is seenas rhegreatesrdisadr,antage of this medium is that such expressions do not allow an1'univocaltr.anslation of the messaees t h e ' c o n v e yi n t o r h e I i n g u i s t i cc o d e t h a t g e n e r a r e tsh e d o m i n a n ts i e n i f i I a tions.This relativenon-translatabilityol the varioussemioticelemenrsused to be put dou,n either to a deficiency,to fixation at a pre_genitalstage,to a rejectionof Law, to a cultural incapacityor to somecombinationof these. In fact, it is our whole perspecriveof interprerativeanalysis that should be profoundlv re-shapedinto a difrerenttype ofanalysis ofthe unconscious, in which non-signifyingsemioticejemenrswould be in the forelront. orre-to-oneanalysisand institutionalanalysis,r'hatever their theoretical arguments,are essentiallydifrerent,becauseof the very difrerentrange of semioticmethodsthey employ. Institutional psychotherapyhas many more semioticcomponents, which make it extremeryhard to respectthe sacrosanct principleof 'the analvst'sneutrality':it can ,put martersright,, but it can also make them much r,r'orse. The institutionsometimes,u....d, in settinggoing non-signif\'ingmachinesrhar work rowardsa liberarionofdesire,in theiun,! !1'a' as do literarv, artistic, scientificand other machines.Then, too. the problernof the micro-politicalchoicesmade by the analysror the analvtic group is more acute and sometimeslar more ,open, than in one_ro-one analvsis.In the nature ol the case,the classicalpsychoanalystis put into a positionin rvhich he can almost never- evenshould he wish to - siand aside lrom his role as dn agent lor normalizing libido and behaviour. In an i n s t i t u t i o n t, h e s t a t u so l b o t h t h e s u b j e c t i v a t i oann d t h e t r a n s l e r e n ci e s ouite d ifferent. The non-signil,vingand diagrammatic effecrs,as well as the eilbcts o[ signifrcance and interpretation,can thus assumelar greaterproportionrhan in a one-to-oneanalysis,and can poisoneverysmalest detail ofeveryday life, The mania lor interpreting everything, the incessantwatch kept on the s u p p o s e d ' s l i p s ' o f t h eu n c o n s c i o u sc,a n r e a c h t h e p o i n t o f w , h a t m i g h t be calleda 'paradigmaticinstitutionarperversion'.It then becomesevident that the blackmaili'g of peopleinro anal;,sis,and the anguishwhich accompanies it, se^'e to reinlorce the rnechanismsof identification with, and indeed mimicrv of, the gurus of analysis. Thus a nert, rype of psychoanaly.tic despotismhas come into being in recent years in most of the chirdren,s i n s t t t u t i o nw s h e r ep e o p l ea r e ' i n t e r e s t e idn a n a l v s i s ' . our schizo-analvsis setsout to be radically di{rerentrrom such supposed 'institutional anall'ses'.In schizo-analysis, what mattersis the reverseof this focusirg on the signifier and on analyticai 'leaders'. It seeksto lbsrer a semroticpolv-centrismbv assistingthe formation of relatir,.ely autonomous and non-rranslatablesemioticsubstances,by giving equal acceptance to all desirew'hetherit makessenseor not, by not ...king to makesubjecti'ation fit in with the dominant significationsand social laws. Far lrorn its objective
.-.
;8
Institutional Psvchotherapv
b e i n st o ' c r r r e ' p e o p loef b e h a v i o u trh a t f a l l so u t s i d et h e u s u a ln o r m s ,i t f i n d sa placefor al! the singuiaririesof thoseu'ho, for one reasonor another,are an r:xceptiorlto the generalrule. How can such collectiveforcesundo the e{fects of the anaivtic rush that has becomeespeciallyvirulent sinceeven commercial radio phone-inshave decidedthat one oltheir functionsis to spreadits blessings? Well, at the very least,they can dealrvith it by laughingat it, and so pretensionsofpsychoanalystsofall bit bv bit deflatingthe pseudo-scientific k i n d s . I n t h i s w , a v t h e r e w ' i l l b e ' s e m i o t i c a l l vl o r m e d ' , b u t a l s o s o c i a l l y ,-,rganized, beginningsof resistance- resistancenot mereiy to the evils of psychoanalysis,but also to the various techniquesol intimidation used to modelsand the hierarchies rnakepeoplein generaiacceptthe famii,v-centred onl;-on of the system.l,et rnemakeit clear:I wish to condemnpsychoanalysis which would irehalfof a diilerent kind of analysis,a micro-politicalanal,vsis never- at least never deliberately- let itself be cut oil from the real or the social. CJn behalf, in other words, of a genuine analvsis. For mv main is that they do not actuallymaiiean analvsis ronCemnationof psy-choanalysts at all. The1,entrenchthemselvesin their consultingrooms and behind their translerences, so that tl'recure can take placein a test-tubefreeofall outside They have made analysisan exercisein the sheercontemplac:ontamination. tion ofevoiving signifiers.punctuatedby interpretationswhictrare generally nothing more than pointlessgamesof seduction. Li:t us return for a moment to a problem we discussedearlier:the use of irsvchotropicdrugs. Up to now, apart from their function as a bone of contention,they have been made to servea despoticsignifvingsemiology.an iilterpretationolproblems in terms of categoriesclosedin upon themselves. havecondemnedthem alongwith the rr'hole T'hisis why the anti-psvchiatrists psvcho-pathnlogicaisemiologv, The use of drugs is in lact determined nccording to medical categories as much as those of social or even police repression.Nlaking a noiseand causinga disturbancebecomesan abnormality to be dealt with by a drug. But is the lact that drugs are used in this rrpressiveway really reasonenoughto condemntheir usealtogether?In some experimentsin institutional psychotherapy;an attempt has been made co towardsa certain collectiveexperimentareorientatepsycho-pharmacology rion, in which the adrninistrationof drugs no longer dependssolely on a cloctorlpatientrelationship,but is decidedupon by staffandpatientstogether irr a eroup. Insteadofthe laboratorl,'sbeing the referencepoint, it is now - at ieastthis is the ideal aimed at - a collectivemobilizationof the group'sbodily intensities and subjective elTects.This creates the conditions for a kind of 'management'of people'soddities rather than a systematicobliteration of them. There is no moiecular di{Ierencebetrveenthe drug given as a means of police repression,and the drug used to quieten disturbed patients in the
,EsH11*2_Jt
/illlv
The Role olthe Signifierin the Institution 7g hospital'The differencebetweencertaindrugsin the modern pharmacopoeia and theillegaldrugs to which peoplebecomeaddictedis ofrenor.rlyu *utt". of their side-effects, which may welr be eiiminatedin rhe ruture.one need onry recall the role of mesca.lin in the work of Henri N{ichauxto seehow drugs can be part of a svstemolintensitysemioticailyformedalong non-signiryinglines. But nowadavsdrugsare mainly usedin psvchiatryro. p"u.po...iir.p.i..r*. As the classicclassificationof iilnesseshas railen inio iirr.., people haue tended more and more to be lumped together. In the Unitej States.lor i n s t a n c em , o s t p r o b l e m sa r e n o w p u r i n t o t h e omnibus.",.g"rr;i..iirophrenia- and once the word has beenused,rranquilrizers w,iribe prescribed in verr high dosages.yet psl,cho-pharmacoiogy could just as easily be directed ro the consritutionof a non-signiryingsimiotic, iiit were riberated from medical over-encodrng, from the po*.. Jr,h. state, the murtinationar corporationsand so on. Then, insteadofcrushing ali that wealth ofexpres_ rhat opening-out to realit,vand the ,Jciur, it rvould help ever1, :io:, .1ll i n d i v i d u a lr o m a k e t h e m o s to f t h e i r p o t e n t i a l . one objectionthat has beenraisedagainstcoriectivea'arytic forcesseems to me somewhat paradoxical, There is a danger, it is said, that specific individual desireswill be crushed,rhar a new tyie of despotismwill dwerof . Peopleu,ho say this must be undersrandingmi proposalsin rermsof their o.wnexperienceof group analysis,and analysisin institutions. Let me repeat, then,that I arn lar lrom proposingto replaceindividual anall,sis*ith d;;; techniques- which certainrycould result in toning down individual difrerences'\then i ralk olcollecti'e rorcesI do not necessarill,'mean groups:they canbe indi'iduals, but alsorunctio's, machines,ail sortsof semio,i..yrt.... onlv if ''r'eger back to the molecurarorder of desiremachines, in other rvords, somethingmore basic than the group and the individuar (towards what Lacan calls the objetpettt'a') shall we succeedin breaking up".t th. -u.rproduced monoliths of our institutional structures so as to free those in marginalpositionsofdesirerrom the neuroticdead-ends in which they are at present.The tendency of the individuation of desire is alwavs towards paranoiaand individuarism.so the probiem is to find colrectivewavs our of the t;'rann' of sysremsbasedon idenrificationand individuation. Ii i. qrii. true that the effectsolgroups are all too likely to lead to closedry.,._r, ,o elitistassumptions- attitudesthat are xenophobic, pha.llocratic or whatever. But such re-territoriarizations, to rhe exteni that they take efrectvia creative collectivities,can open whole new perspectives. In fact, there is a vast differenceberrveenthe neurotic encirclementof a subject.ir,.itv er_,gaged in a processof personologicarindividuation, and the idiosyncrasies'of"groups r v h i c ha r e p r e g n a n r v i t hp o s s i b i l i t i eosf c h a n s e ofall kinds. As a final example, take rhe caseof a psJ,chotic child banging its head againsta u'a.llday after da,v.A machine ol'seltdestructrve isworkins loutssance
8o
lnstitutional PsychotheraPY
alvayon its ou,n,entirelyout ofanyone'scontrol.How could the desireenergy be related in any wav to collective of banging-one's-head-against-the-u'all It is not a matter ol'transposingor sublimatingthis activitv,but engagement? cif getting it to function on a semioticregisterthat can be connectedup to systems;not of curbing the desireor changingits certainother non-signif,ving openingup ne\.r'possibilities, trbjects,Lrutofbroadeningthe field afjouisnnce, Yet it rvili be di{Iicult to fruslrate attempts !o use repressionand enforce centredon adaptationunlessone can make it abundantlyclearthatjoaissrznce t h e r g n e l r r a l s l e a d st o t h e : e m p t a t i o nt o g i v e i t i t s e x t r e m ee x p r e s s i o-n i n impotenceand destruction. has to doesnot mean that a sLrbject Emergencelrom destructivenarcissisrn go through a processof being repressedin reality or being castratedin phantasy:on the contrary, it meansachievinggreaterpotencyand neutralizing the {brcesof alienation. It is thereforeessentiallya matter of gaining power over the real, neverjustof manipulatingthe phantasiesor the symbols. Ferna.adDeligny doesnot repressor interpret:he helpsthe riebilitatedwith whorn he lives to succeedin trying out other objectsand relationships,to succeedin building up anotherworld. it tends Analysisaimed at re-adjustmentdevelopsa politicsof significance; to reducethe horizonofdesireto the controlofthe other,to the appropriation ofbodies and organs;it seeksto return to a Pure awarenessofthe senseofselL Schizo-analysis,on the other hand, rejects the'will to identity', and all signifying personologicalspecifications,especiallythose relating to the fam' ily. It abandons strategiesof power in lavour of an organlessbody that de-individuatesdesireand is ready to seeit expressedby way of non-semiotic cosmic fluxes and non-signilying socio-historicfluxes. In the traditional analytic approach, whenever one passesfrom a presignifying semiotic to a signif,vingsemiotic,there is a lossofsatisfaction,a new scopefor guilt feelings,a manifestationof the super-ego.When a child plays 'matter' involved (this is a very important with its shit there is a certain point). When an analytic interventiontries to transform this pleasure,this matter, into a semiotic substancethat can be translatedand interpreted according to the dominant code, it ends by mutilating or destroying it, 'signifyingsemioticcounterpart'that replacesthe organless attachingit to a body" Programming individuals, conditioning them to the idea that their desirescan always be translated into something else, is what normative institutionshave always spent their time doing. Far from changingthings, psychoanall'sismerely brings an improved technology to bear on precisely the sametype of project. It remirinsto be seenwhat is the rationalelor this psychoanalyticpplicv of presented itselfat this point as desire. Why has psychoanalysis emascr-rlating religion?Whoseproblemsare they ultimatelv?Essentiaia kind of s'.rbstitute
The Role of the Signifierin the Institution
Br
iy. they relateto thosepor+,ergroups whoseinterestit is to seethat all praxis shouldbecometransferable,indefinitelytransposable in termsof an economy ofdecodedfluxes;essentiallyto capitalism(and in future perhapsto bureaucratic socialismas well?)in that it is basedon laws that establishtire eenera.l equivalenceand interchangeabilityof all semiotic expressions.of course jouissance is stiil possiblein such a system, but only on conditionthat the libido conforms with the dominant norms. Nera,and peculiar types of perverts develop within it - for instance, the bureaucraticpervert, whose curious pleasureshave been so marvellouslyexplored by Kafka. The power of the bureaucracykeepsgrowing like a cancerin the labric ofindustrialsocieties, to the advantageofthe'elites' that have accessro its bene6ts.But sincethereis room lor few at the top, and getting there is expensiveand needsspecial preparation and education, the rejects of desire are innumerable. Their enjoymentof what capitaiismhas to o{reris reducedto a fling at rhe berting shop on Sunday morning, and the joys of football on rhe TV on Sunday afternoon.But there are equally innumerablerejectsfrom the betting shop and the lootball games)with the result that a whole massof peopleend up in ps1'chiatrichospitals,homesfor the maladjusted,re-trainrngschemes,prisons and so on.
Towards a Micro-Politicsof Desire 83
Towards a Micro-Politics of Desire'
Introduction Structurnlistanalysestrv to mask the basicduality betweenconrentand form Lrl attending only to form, setting the content in parentheses,believingit lcgitimate to separate rvork relat.ingto content lrom u'ork relating to lornr. 'firis is one wav of r:rganizirrgthe niconnaissance of the political origins of the lvav contentis lormaiized.What u,eshould be doing is to comparea political genealoeyof significativecontentswith the wavs in which the speechacts of translcrrmationaland generative grammars are produced. Structuralists seemio find no problem of semantics.Tfie semanticcomponentappearsor d(-)es not appear at this or thatjuncture, but they take it as read, as going without sayine,and neverquestionit as such. No one is concernedto discoverthe particular lorm ofstructuring ofeach tvpe r,'fcontent;the!'are by u'ay of believingrhat the problemof lormalizingit onl"' a1rps315 once it is caught up in the form/content relationship,and e\rerythins to do u,ith determining the origin of that lormalism is then translerredto the signifier,the chainsofsignifiers.Yet it is alw,aysa specific politicai and social order that moulds them. There is nothing auromatic about the structuringofcontents:the socialsituationis not a superstructural content rnechanicallydeterminedbv an economicinfrastructure)any more than the semantic territorv is mechanicallv determined by a signi$,ing structure' or the various manilestationsof a primitive societv bv the elementarvstructuresol'lamilial relationships. J'crtll to explain complexsocio-historical structuresin termsof a mechanism oi'exchange, or lan{uagein ternrsofa svstemoflogical transformation,or desirein terms of the operation ola signilyingsystemand rhe phantasiesit generates,is to trl' to avoid questioningthe operationsofporr,erthat control the socialsphereat every level. It is not a matter ofproducing a universal form:riismas such.but of the way a svstemof power comesto usethe meansol a sigiriiyingformalismto uni{i'all the variousmodesof expression, and centre thernaround irs orvn 'fundamentai'values- respectlor propertv.lor persons, i . F r o n : a c o ur s eq iv c n r o t h e s t u d e nt s a r R c e d H a l l , C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s it l , N e w Y o r k . p a r r so i - i t h a v r S r r r r p u b l i s h c Ci t S e m i t t t c a x tn, d i n a n i s s u eo f Q ai n I r o n o u ro f C h r i s r i a n M e t z - .N { r r . i q 7 5 .
'right' lor ranks, lor sexual.racial and age hierarchies,for the of the ruling produc!.ion classto seizethe meansof lrom the workersand so on. In reality, therefiore, we are neverdealingt,ith an abstractstructure,a kind of ideal game of chess,a iogical mould shaping all significantcontents.All contents,before being structured by language,or 'like a language',are structured at a multitude of micro-politicallevels.It is preciseiythis lact which justifies the lact that a micro-politicalrevolutionaryaction makesit possibleto relati',,izethe'dominant significations'and to neutralizethe forms of indication and regulationput forward bf the structuralists.Denying the lunction of power in representationimplies a refusal to make a micro-political commitmentwhereverit may be needed,in other rvordswhereverthere is a signification. lVhat we ha.,'eto do, then, is to get rid of this great oppositionbetweenthe contentand the form, rvhichresultsin separatingthe two and.leavingthem in some sens€independentof one another, and, on the contrary, try to find connecringpoints,points ofmicro-politicalantagonismat everylevel.Every power lormation organizesits own s.vstemof verbal packagingfor what it has to say. The expressionmachine,which extendsover all theseformations,is to centralizeand rendertranslatthereonly to normalizelocalficrmalizations, able the unchanging signification recognizedby the dominant order, to demonstratea ionsensus- what Louis Hjelmslev terms the level of the immediatesubstance,and definesas a collectiveapperception. What goeson betweencontent and lorm is the stabilizingof the relation' ships of de-territorialization.The a-signify'ingsign machine, the sl,stemof figuresof expression(still using Hjelmslev'sterms), comesinto existenceat the point where all signifyingsemiologiesmeet. Its role is similar to the role the State plays in relation to the variousfactionsofthe bourgeoisie,that of orderingand hierarchizingthe pretensionsofthe diflerentiocal groups.The non-signifyingexp{essionmachine (on the level of the signifier) organizesa system of empty words and interchangeabilityfor all the territorialized systems of words produced by the manifold local agenciesof power. (We may instancethe power of the lamily over the production of nice speech,or the powerof the schoolover the productionof nice writing, discipline,competition, hierarchy, etc.) Thus, bv means of a non-signifvings)'stemof expressiona moderateregime of de-territorializationbecomesstabilized,and capturesand regulatesrelativede-territorializations of lormalisrnsofcontent. FranqoisJacob suggeststhat 'natural' encodingmight function in three dimensions.Todorov reckonsthat symbolicsemiologiesspecificallyinvolve two dirnensions.Only linguistic encoding is left functioning on a linear svstem(and in a wav that FrangoisJacob insistsmust be carefullydistinguishedlrom geneticencoding,which is relativelylessde-territorialized).If we lollorvtheseauthors,then, we ma.vbelievethat the modesof encodinggo
8,1 Institutional PsYchotheraPY and di{Ierentiationin so far as through a kind o{'processof moiecularization ptive perce of strata ":"1 :tp,:tj:::i:1": rhe], relate to lineuistic ,t*tu' tht this tendency to oeextending imagine ii".g"i"i. strata. One can even semioticsof the sciences'rvhich abanterritorializationwith the a-signifying lu"guugt by introducing sy:teTs-?f don thc c,ne-dimensron"l;;"t'lt* oi -".riete-siqn:;Inoointoffa.t,thedifferencebetweenrhesignandrnhatit . tS ofl lits O r- .-:.^^r^--a\ c a p n r c lto ^ llose o s e ssome ome instance) seems for sigrtifies(in theoretrcarphytic'' particleofa proofofthe existence relevance.No one toa"y ai*unds positiue without any contradictionin the totality fu''tction to made be carr il as so long when an extrinsic'experimentaleflect of theoreticalsemlottcas a whole' Onlv doeshindsightquestionthe exrstoPeratloll into brings the semioticsvstem woulclbe meaningless'It is onlv enceolthe particle. U"'ii^iftt", the question totalitv that the e.xcludedt'v tt"'t ttttotttic-cum-experimental ;;;t";.i;d existenceOne has negative charge-of a kindof particleretroactivel,vutqui"' demonstrationofthe particle'sexistencc; then no longerto givea step-b1'-step - objectiveof materializing its one has given up the hiiherto fundamental spaceand time This type of in it existenceby the physicaieffectof locating in other words entities thar ser.iotic involves ."r,at'*. .^rt particie-;igns, the sign and the and existence'Betr'veen eludethe coordinatesof rime, space direct' but longer no of relarionship' referent there is no* o r,.r" lvpe gagement' involf ing a r.'holetheoretic-cum-experimental-en \\rithr]on-sienilying-rernioti.rofthiskind,*e-ha"tleftthesphereof the potenc'vof machinic engagement' semiologicalpo',".rl.uir"" for that of physics could equall-vbe 'fhe exarrrplef f,"t. ttg;t'ted frorn theoretical so on' and artistic social' ,"orked out in other domains relationto signification' in politics possible two u" In mv vierv,ttt.tt, titttt expectsthere{oreto find and i{Iect' Either one acc,pt,\t d'i'i' u'an inlvitable contextof a particular the deJacto'1n \t ott"ptt it itt evervsemioriclet'ef o' on" a generalizedn-rtcro'n'ith it cou^nter to proposes and one f,riiri."r systern, in such a way as to within' .iruggrc that can undermine it lrom il;t.;i the t1'rannvof the lrom escape to enable all the tntenstvemultiplicities a whole host of means"is-unleashing this signifying over-encoding'What of of ichizophrenics' children' a,-,cle*periJentations thoseof expi'essions trate pene to work all that everykind no[o..*uoi., of priioners' of misfitsof order' to feelout new escaperoutes una .u, ir-,,othe semiologyof the dorninant of a signifvingparticle-signs' .onsrellations .r,J pr"ar.. nervand ,,L,ir.o.d-of and Semiotics I)esire Minorities, Psychoanalysis rviderthau that providedby has Iong enjoyedan audiencelar Psychoanall'sis .|o hastrieclto definea norm the bourrdarv ils orvn adePts. tnt J*"tlt that it - it hasstrayed behaviour human in betn een the normal ond th" pathological
Towards a Micro-Politics of Desire 85 onto political ground. This is becausethe social forcesthat the processof capitalistproductionhas to deal with are directly concernedby the definition of any such systemol norms, any such model for living, any such model of desiring subjectivitv,correspondingto the sort of'normal' individual required by the system.In earlierages,religiousor philosophicaldisputesstood in the samerelationshipto the field ofsocialstrugglesas psychoanalysis does today. But the policy of psychoanalysis consistsabove all in claiming to be altogetheroutside the political field, to be consideredas an objectivescience. It hassoughtto takeits standon varioussciences-biology,physicsand, more recently,mathematicsand linguistics- but has reallysucceeded only in aping them. Furthermore, it has never managed to get a\\,ay lrom the kind of sectarianismthat makes psychoanalyticsocietieslook more like corporations fighting for their own intereststhan bodiesworking for the advancementof science.Having failed to find any seriousscientific support, psychoanalysis has retreated into a flurry of 'literary' activity which has done littie to enlightenanyoneas to what it actuallvdoes. Freudianism,at the sametime as discoveringthe scopeof our unconscious investmentsof desire,selsabout dispellingtheir 'evil spells'.From the start, psychoanalvsis ried to make sure that its categorieswere in agreementwith the normativemodelsof ttreperiod. It thus contributedto settingup a further barrierto desire;it arrived in the nick oftime,just as crackswereappearingin a lot ofrepressiveorganizations- the lamily, the school,psychiatryand so on, But what it did was to set up a more internal barrier which restrainedthe subjectiveeconomyoldesire more closely,taking hold of it in the cradle,and trving never to let go. There are no limits to the ambition of psychoanalytic control; if it had its way, nothing would escapeit, since it is concerned simultaneouslywith madness,dreams,deviationsof everykind, art, history, the primitive world, and even the most minor motions of everyday life, the tiniesterror or slip. All non-sensemust thus yield to its explanatorynet, must fit into the compassof its comprehension.Take homosexuality,lor instance: psychoanalysisclassesit as a pen,ersion,defining it as a fixation at an inlantile stage- a stage defined in turn as pre-genital and 'polymorphously perverse',So, by the use of a supposedlyobjectivedescription,it implicitly sanctionsa norm, a correct genitality, a legitimate form of desire which automaticallydisallowsthe desireof children, homosexuals,the mad, even, whenit comesdown to it, of women,or of youngpeoplewho havenot yet fully acceptedthe marriage/familv orthodoxy. To the extent that a revolutionary strugglemanagesto break alvay lrom the dominantmodels,and especiallyfrom that model of models,capital (which consists in reducingthe multiplicitiesof desireto a singleundifferentiated flux -of workers,consumers,etc.); to the extent that it managesto break away lroma Manicheist,black-and-whitesimplificationof the classstluggleand to
86
Institutional Ps.vchotherapy
accepilhe plurality of desiringcomnrirmentsas possrblelinls benveenpeople in revolt and the revolution; to thar exrent it will be led to take account of 'normirlity" and to seek about minoritiesof ;rll ki1ds, without any pre.judices For ther.eto be such a change,we should have frrst to identifv their s1p-rport. rvith its legirimationofand neutralizethe mocielsassumedb.vpsychoanalysis, and of assumec of Oedipus the dogma fit in to the repressionof desire "vith t a n r p e 6 p l st o d a ya g r e er h a t n o r e v o i u t i o n a r sy t r u g g l ei s c i . r r a r i u n .A q r . e am really possibleanv longer that doesnot a/socommit itselfto the liberationof desire.But \^,eare sriil unableseriouslyto contemplateopeningup neu'fronts dilernma: of clesire,becauseu'e are still trappedbv the classicps-ychoanalytic as far.asdesireis concerned)its porveris dangerous,destructive,incapable o l a n v t h i n gc o n s t r u c t i v e : as lar as our egoand our societvare concerned,thereis tlreworld ofreality rvith whicl-r.1,1emLlStsomehou'or other come tO terms, to which one must submit, evenrhough later claiming that orredid so becausethat was tile onll w a y o f o b t a i n i n sm a s t e r ) ' o fi t , Yet surel,vthc-real madnessis to be four]d,fir'stand forenrost,at the core ol Surelvreasonis to [e found' first and foremost,at the capitalistorder as sr,tcli! disruptir.e and the core of the maddest desirel Desire is not necessaril,r' be seenas more can of authoritv, Desire.oncefreedfr.omthe control a_narchic. than the skilful engineer, more and organizer better a realistic, real arlrirnore raving rationalismttf the plannersand administratorsof the presentsvstem. creation- thesethings prolileratefrom desire,not from Science,ir-rnovation, of the technocrats. the pscrrclo-rationalism movementand should is no science:it is a politico-religious Psvchoanalysis be treated in the same !!'av as all tlie other movementsthat have proposed moclels of behaviourfor particular timesat'rdcontexts.Its conceptionof desire o n l l I i t i s a h e a do n l l i n p c r t e c t i n gt h e i s . a h e a co l f irs time'in appearance support required by the logic of the system,and overhaulinga r.epressive represtecirniqueof interpretingand re-directingdesireand of internarlizing call colLectiw would what I is. in brief, siotr. Tlte object of ps)rchoanaiysis into operatione\/erYthingthat militates I.taranoia in other lr'ords,bringing desirein the socialsituatiot'r.Belorestudying againstan.,,liberationo1'schizo the particular',extremepositionofpsychoanalvsisacrossthe spectrumofthe variousdegreesofthat collectiveparanoia,let us first considerthis functionrn itselfand G. role it plavs in the socialspherein general.onll'after that shall rests,and u,etrr- ro identil! the specificnlechanismson which psychoanalysis rvill be to aim our intensifred. u,hoseiunctioning has in some sensebeen complementar.v the paranoia. collective of ola coelncient the nature ciefir-re anci inverse coellicient I posited some ten )ears ago as a'coettrcient of transversaliil.". I shali encleavourhere t0 set rid of the notronof two opposin.s.realities,one
Towards a Mioo-Politics of Desire g7 objective,the other subjective,and replaceit with that ortwo possible roliricr: a poli ticsofinterpretationthar keepsgoingover and over the pastin the realm ofthe unconsciousphantasy,and a politicsofexperimentationthat takes hold of the existingintensitiesof desireand forms itselfinto a desiringmechanism in touch with hi.storicalsocial reality. Interpretation or experimentation, 's.cientific' psychoanalysis or rhe politicsofdesire?To get to the roorsofthese alternatives,we shall have to get back ro rhe origins ofpsychoanarysis and politics as they normally appear,and try to seehow eachofthem relaresto language. lVe make our interpretations with words, whereas we clo our exp.erimenting*'ith signs, machinic funcrions,anci engagements of things and people.At first sight, it would seem that the t'6,omusr remain suite separate, How can the introduction of polirics contribute to clarifying matters?one would have said that feelings,action, theory and machinisni mark offdifferent orders of things that should nol be confused:yet it seems to me to be 'itar to prevent their crystalizing into compretely separate s tr at a . !'rom this we shall have to go back still further, within the framework o{' linguistics,and considerthe possib.iliry ora semioticthat could explain both the functioningofthe word as signifierand that ofscienrificsigns,technical/ scientific mechanismsand sociaiforces.we should then find oirselves facing a fundamentalpolitical dilemma within one and the samesemioricwhole, a whole capable of opening out into non-signifying semioticsand alrowing for the transition of rhe objective sciencesinto signifying and subjectivizing langr-rages. srudents of semioticsare already aiviaea into thosewho relati semiotics to the sciencesof language, and those who consider language merelyone among other instancesof the functioningof a generarsemiolic.'It seemsto me that the result of this debateis that, in the first case,desire gets boggeddorvn in the Imaginary by becoming invested in a system otsigiificant flights *hich I shail call paradigmatic perversion,whereas. in' the second,it participatesin a-signifyingsemioticengagemen!s invorvingsignsas well as things' individuals as well as groups, o.gun, u. well as fori., o. machines'The politicsof the signifierlead to a signmachinemarking our rhe territorialized fluxes - by means of a limited collection of discrete, ,digitalized'sisns- and retainingoniv ffuxesof inlormarionthat can be decoded.The role of that sign machine is to produce, in Hjelmsrev'sterm, ,semioticalry formed substances',that is to say strata of exp;essionwhich rbrm a connection betweenthe two domains formalized at the level ofexpressionand that of content;for linguistic anaiysts,this operation produces an effectofsignification.The totalitv of intensivereaiitv is rhen .processed' bv the formaizing duo, signifier/signified;the totarity of fluxes is held in tl",e.snapshot' o? significationwhich placesan objectfacinga subject;the movement oidesireis sterilizedby a relationshipolrepresentation;the image becomes the memory
BB InstitutionalPsychotherapy of'a realitv made impotent, and its imrrobilization establishesthe rvorld of dominant sienificationsand receivedideas. T h i s o p e r a t i o no { ' c o n t r o l l i n a g l l t h e i r r t e n s i vm e u l t i p l i c i t i e cs o n s t i t u t e tsh e fir'st act cri political violence. The relation between the sienifier and the significd(which Peirceseesas corl\'entional,Saussureas arbitrarr,)is at root merelv the expressionof authorit,vby meansof signs.The expressionof the conrext,of what is implied and presupposed, in other words of all that relates rnorc or lessclosel.vto the interactiono{'authority'andof desire,is dismissed bl,specialistsin the human sciencesas being outsidethe termsof their studv, 'offthe subject',rather as a judge misht cail to order a witnesswho will not stick to the questionbeingasked,or a sroup of policemenwili lorciblv remove bystandersr'r'hoare watching them ill-treatingsomeone.The establishment of meanings.of rvhat is to be understood.has to remain the businessof authoritv. Tools of expressionare plovided tor thosewho usethernin the same',vavas spadesand picks are handed or,rtto pnsoners.The pensar"rdexercisebooks given to schoolchildrenare toolsof production,and teachinqis proerammed to produce onlv a certain tvpe olacceptablesignifications.There can be no ol which no one must plead escape,The first commandment of the 1211,, ignorance, is Lused above all on the need for evervone to realize the importanceof the dorrinant signi6cations. All the intensitiesof desiremust be subject to the rule of the formalizing duo, expressionand content, as elaboratedin the context of pre',,ailingproduction relations.Apart from madnessand t-rtherescapesfrorn the rneaninglessness olthe sYstem.that is. The Signs Pervade even Physical Fluxes trt is not easv io extricate oneself from the politics of signification and i n t e r p r e t a t i o nI.n t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e sa, c e r t a i nf a s h i o no f a p i n g ' s c i e n t i f i c rigour'. wirich draws attention ar.vavlrom the political issues at stake, inevitablv leads to a concealeddependenceon those metaphvsicalparal o e i s m sa. l w a v st h e s a m e ,t h a t b e a ro n r e a i i t y - t h e s o u la n d s i g n i f i c a t i o n . f'ake. fbr instance,the researchinto communicationnow eoing on in the U n i t e d S t a t e s :w h a t i s i r b u t a n o b j e c t i v i s tt r a p , a l a l s e a l t e r n a t i v et o The researchersrvorking at the l\{ental Repsychoannlltic sub.jectivism? search Institute of Palo Alto, w,ith Gregory Bateson. exarnine on.ly the 'behaviour' the_vbelievecan be consideredas a 'term of communication'.' Transposirrethe subdivisionsuggestedby Carnap and Morris into syntactics, semanticsand pragmatics, thev end bv separating,in the name of s e n r a n i i c rosn, ed i m e n s i o no f c o m m u n i c a t i o nw. h i l es t i l l m a i n t a i n i r rag c e r t a i n . . B e a v i n .D . . l a c k s o n ,P r n g m a t i cott l l u n a n C o m m u n i t a t i o\ V r . P . \ \ ' a t z l a r v i c k . . JH n ,. W . N o r t o n , N c u Y o rk . r o i l :
Towards a Micro-Politics of Desire gg externalrelationto it. According to them, behaviouris mereiva ,pragmatic of communication'iit is whollv devotedto the transmissionof inlormation, to t h e c i r c u l a r i n go f s l m b o l s b e t w e e nu t r e r e ra n d r e c e i v e r a, n d t o t h e i r feedb a c k .T h e ' s e m a n c i c p ' r e s u p p o s i t i oonf t h i s s y s t e mo f i n t e r c o n r m u n i c a t i o n s 'sender restsupon the idea that the and receiver'of the symbolstransmitted has 'agreedbeforehandon their significance'.His behaviouris thus reduced to a flux of inficrmation,or at least to dependenceon that flux. But what of desirein all this exchangingof information?Is a manilesrationof desirea jamming of the transmission,a noise,or sheerderight at a clear receptionof the nressaee?All that these researchersseem interested in is tire wav inlormation is organized syntacticaily and the pragmatic srrategy of be'haviour' l\'hen it comesto the meaning,they stop: it seemsto be something that thev rhink goeswithout saying. It could hardly relate to anything bul philosophy.syntax depends on rhe nobre scienceof mathemaiicar iogic. Pragmatics.however,belongspurelv and simply to psychology. can one at least say rhar this di'ision inio three is a rereaserrom the despotismcf the signifier?No, for behaviouristcommunicationis still deoendenton_the mvsteryofsignification.They can only keepit at a distance, and in lact it r.r'illahvays continue to influence every stage of behal,iour. More porverfullythan ever,in fact,lor its beingrelegatedto the statusofthe impricit meansthat it will trigger off an even more demanding formalism. it.y remainthe priso'ers ola supposedlyimmediateapperceptionofsignification, of a signify'ingsemiologicalcogito. h is only in upp.urun.., then, rhar this neo-behaviourist schoolhas avoidedbeingboggeddown in the psvchoanalyticals,vstemof signification,Indeed, one may wonder whetherihere has not beena kind ofdivision oflabour among thosewho have set out to analvse behaviour on rhe basisof inlormation theory and thosewho ha'e decided to analvseits significantcontent on the basisof the oedipalist interoretation, For the former, 'behaviour'is reducedto one of two 'binary digits,,while lor the latter it is triangulatedlone may similarly fiid oneseliwolnd.rirrn u, theanalogousproceedingsundertakenby structuralistanthropologir,,,ut.n thevinsiston understandingprimitive societiessolelyin termsof rheir lamilv relationships,which they then reduce to a logic of exchange, o. ut th" goings-on ofliterary sectsthat are religiouslydeJicatedto ro-.il.d readings o f a ' t e x t 'b t ' i t s e l f l whate'er is takenas the gauge,whetherit be the signifier,the iibido or the matrimonialunit of excha'ge,the method is the same:what is constant is the idea that one must discover a univocal rererencepolnt, a transcendant invariable,not itselfsignificative,rvherebyto explain rhe sum ofthe sisnificativearrangements, One setsout in searchof a mechanism_ no, u rnuJhina. which is a very di{rerentthingr - rhat wourd fix the fluxes,determine the
go
Institutional Psychotherapy
intersections,identi{v certain fixed points, stabiiizethe structuresand provide a reassuringfeelingof hai.'ingat last got hold olsomethingquasi-eternal in the human sciences,while at the sametime absolvingthe researcherfrom all political responsibility.This certainlyseemsto be the sensein which one could understandone leaturethat is common to the di{Ierentdisciplinesthat usethis method,in which we may find the kev to the motivationbehindsuchat first sisht surprising.-mergersas that ofpsvchoanalysis and behaviourism in Bateson, that of a linguistic dominated b1, diachronic phonology and Lacanian psychoanalysis in Laing, that of the epistemological tradition and Nlarxism in Althusser,and so on. Our aim is not to blur the differences among the varioussemioticmachines, but, on the contrary,to seeas clearl_v aspossi.ble rvhatis specificto each,nor to make one dependenton another as does a thinker like Benvdniste- who concludesthat sinceeverysemiologl'ofa non-linguisticsvstemhas to make use of languageas an interpreter, it 'could onl.v exist through and ln the semioiosycillanguage'.'With this in rrind, I proposethe lollowing classific;rtion of'the modesof encoding:non-semiotic'natural' encoding,signifi,ing semioloqies, and non-signilyingsemiotics. r" Non-semiotic'natural'
chains of encoding
These do not involve a specificsemioticstratum. As with geneticcoding,for example, they are lormed out of the same tvpe oi material as the encoded biologicalJ'luxes. There is no diflbrentiationor independence as betweenthe biologicalstratum - the encodedobject - and the informationalone. It is simpl,vthat certain of the elementsolthe fluxesof energyand the biological fluxes are so speciaiizedas to be able to do the work ol transmitting and procltrcir-rg the code.Sincethe stullof the expressionis not actuallva stratumzr specilic semiotic substance- no direct translation lrom one system ol encodingto ilnotheris possible. The biologistwho makesa modelof the RNA and DNA chainsis transposingthesesrructuresinto a s,vstemof signs,thus producing ari entirelv nerv basisof expression.It is a very different matter when a signifyingsemiotictransfersa message,lor instancea visual message by n'ay oflfertzian lvaves,to be reconstitutedon the televisionscreen:in this case there is a continuing transmissionof the encoded forms from one substanceto another;that it can be translatedis due to the independenceof the strata ofexpression;it is becauseit has beenpossible!o'extract'the lorm ofdistinct substancesthat it could be transoosed.
c , . S e m i r t t eroq,6 9 , r . z , \ { o u t o n . H e a i s o t a l k so 1 ' s e m i o t i cr n o u l d i n t ' b v I a n g u a g er,h e p r e em i n en c e o l t h e s i g n i ! i n g s y s t e m .et c .
Towards a Micro-Politics of Desire gr z. Semiologies of signification These are constituted lrom specific strata of expression.They may be subdivided into two categories- those that depend upon a muiilpticiiy ot strata,and thosewith only two: (a) svmbolic semiologies: The exp.essionof primitive societies, orthe mad, of children, erc. brings into play a multiplicity of strara - expressionbv g e s t u r e .b ' r i t u a l , b y w o r d s , b y w h a t t h e l . m a k e , s . x r a l e x p r e s s i o na n d so on - but none of these is fully autonomous;rhey overlap, one blending into another,without any one over-encodingthe othersin any continuing way. (b) signif,vingsemiologies: with modern languages,all this muitipricity of expression,all thesestrata- speech,mime, singing,etc._ become dependent on a signifving arche-writing. The semiotic machine norv works onry by way of two strata: that on which contentsare formalized,and that on which expressionis lormalized.In point of fact, theseare not realiy two strataat all, but onlv one: the stratum of signifyingformarizationwhich, from a restrictei stock of figures of expression, establishes a bi-univocar correspondence betweena particularorganizationof the dominantreality and a formalization of representation,Indeed, significativerepresentations- the concepts of saussure- only seanto be structured on an autonomous stratum ofcontent, they only seemto'inhabit'a sour, populate a heaven with ideas o, o.guni". themselvesinto the cult-objects of everyday life. The signifying sei,iotic sustainsthe illusion that a level of'the signified'existsin order to delay, or interferewith, or even prevent,a direct conjunctionbetweensign -achines and real machines. once we come to question the two fundamental levelsof the signifying semiotic, u,e are equaily forced to question the yalidity of the doublelinguisticarticulation.The fact is that what is supposedto gru.unt.. the constitutionof autonomousmeaningfulsoundsis the establishment of their paradigmatic relationshipswith specified,formarizedand srructured contentson an autonomouslevel; but ifthat level,far lrom corresponding to the iogical organization imagined by structural or generative semantic; is merely an aggregateof balancesof lorces,compromisesand approximations ol all kinds, then the whole sructural legitimacy of the signifier/signified relationshipis compromised. The signifying semioticsof double articulation involve signs characterized . by three functions: denotation, representation and signifi-cation.Denoting establishesa relationship berweenthe sign and the thing designated.It is thl referential function, and implies or presupposesthe realit"y of the thing denoted.Denotingis in fact a key elementin the constitutionof the dominanl reality.with representation,the totalitv of the productiveconnectivesynthesesbecomecut up into a denoted(or indexed)reality and a world olimages,
q2
Institutional Psl'chotheraPY
of represcntative,figurative or relationalimages'The sum of thoseimages constitutestvhat we alreaccustomedto call our mental world. Signification resuits fiom relating the signifring basrs of that representationto that representationit..lf.llhu. the sign never rel'ersdirectly to the realitv, but is alivays lorced to go bv way of the world of representation,The linking ,og.rh.. ofsigns around a syntagmaticaxis, the function ofsignrficance,is, to ie'vi^iste, inseparableirom the functionof interpreting,which ac-cording orders the signson a paradigmaticaxis, relatesthem to the world of things signified,und p..*o,1.ntly distancesthem lrom all the intensitiesof realitv. T'ire play of stgnifications,their proliferation,their being out of gear with b..our. of the autonomy and arbitrarinessol the ivay the .epre.sentationi, it openspossibi' stockofsignifiersoperates)I-rascontradictoryconsequences: all direct access cut offfrom a subject produces it also lities for c,ieativitv,but (eilects explored by ghetto in a signi{,v'ing imprisoned zr subject reality, to N{auriceBlanchotin the realm ofliterature). It is true that the lormalization ofsignificantexpressiondevelopsin accordancein'itha certain {brmalizationof signifiedcontenrs;but it would bi: a mistaketo think that the two formalizatiJns are generatedin the sameway. The formalizationof expressiondepends on a pariicular lineuistic machine, a restrictedgamut of discrete'disconnectedsigns.The lbnnalizationof the contentdependson the power balance in societ,v,on a mass of interactions,of machinesand of'structureswhich coulclnot oossiblybe reduced to one homogeneousplane ol meaning' The iilusionof the doubiearticulationconsistsin flatteningout this multiplicitv ol on the signil.vingmachine by using the fiction ol a level of inter.rsities represenlailon. Intensitieshavethus beendoublv reduced:first to fit the signifiedcontents' r. whosedespoticambition is to put everythingthat and then to fit the sigr.rifie a processolrepetition that alwaysbringsit back to it through could represent itsell-.This makeseverythingappear normal, logical,lormalized.The uttcrancesof the significantsemioticstructuresare formulatedover a stratum of impotentization,and echoand re-echoendlessly the echobeing the effectaJ autonomizesand llattens controls, together. draws signilier the signifcation: the signified.As well as being separatedliom real productions,theseuttern,-r...ur. alienatecilrom the understandingthe subjectis supposedto haveof their signilication,and lrom the adherencehe is supposedto give them. The intensitiescan now onlv be noted, controtedas having to remain oulside the semioticsphere,r,vhichmeans,in the last resort,outsidethe politicalsphere. 'fhe formalization of the content thus produces a subjectivity that is essentiallycletachedfrom the real, empty and transparent.a subjectiyitvof pure signifiir-igtllat respondsperfectiyto Lacan',sformula: a signifierrepresentsit lbr anothersignifier.This subjectivityhas to be accountedlor ulder 1vo heads- the subiectofthe statementand the subjectofthe utteranceofthe
Towards a Micro-Politicsof Desire 93 message.*Bv the eflectof a kind of meaninglessechoingback and forth, the subjectofthe messagehas becomethe echo ofthe subjectolthe utterance. Every utterance must ceasebeing polyvocal and, reducedto a bi-univocal mode, be made to fit the subjectof the statement.This is the programmeof linguisticOedipalization.(Linguisticanalystsmay then say rhar the subject of the utterance is merely what remains of the processof uttering in the processo1'the statement. I would turn this the other way round: what concernsme is what remains of the processof uttering in the fact of the utterance.) \\'hat I want to recoverare the indices,the residualtraces,the escapes into transversality,of a collectivearrangementof utterancewhich, under whatevercircumstances,constitutesthe real productiveagencyofeverv semiotic machinism. The programme ol linguistic Oedipalization also consisrsin fbrmalizingthe subjectivationof statementsaccordingto an abstractencoding ofthe I-you-he type,which 'providesthe speakerswith a sharedsystentof personalrelerences'5 and makes them able to adapt to the exchangeability, the transposabilitland the universalitvof a given number of rolesthat they .",t.0 upon to fill within rhe lramework of an economyof de-coded ;itlj: - lor instancethe phenomena Ilrve return to primitive modesof expression of echo-namingamong the Guayakisdescribedby PierreCiastres- we find that thev do not fall under this kind ofdespotismofthe signifier.6I am this, but I am alsothat- There are no exclusivedisjunctivesyntheses. I amJaguar, but that Jaguar also refers to a lot of other things, and speaksfrom a multiplicitvof centresof intensitv:to the messageJaguar'there correspond severalrealmsolutterance.lVhen one ofthoseintensitiesis destroyed,as for instancewhen the animal or man known asJaguardies,the message,though cutofflrom its rea.lmof utterance,preservesall its lorce, Its representationgoeson existingdespitethe abolitionofits referent.It is not univocallvconnectedto a singlesignifier.It continues,it roamsabout, it threatens,preciselybecauseno one knows what to relateit to. The sffata of expression are not regulatedhereby a signifyingcontrolthat condemnsevery contentto a rigorous formalization,a residualor marginal representation; here,this polyvocalconceptoryaguarbecomesthe objectofa fluid, uncertain, waveringdenotation,a denotationunsureof itself,in somecasesevenwith no basisat all, a pure denotation ofdenotation. The referencepoint tends to becomethe denotation's being-in-itself,the expressionof the absenceof 4. It would be more correct to sav the rejection ofthe utterqqce. linguistique giniral.e,Gailimard, r 966. 5. Benviniste, ProbLimes 6. Chronique deslndieu Cua2aki:,Plon, rg7z. This does noi by any means involve a return to lhe ' n o b l e myth of the s a v a g e ' .T h e c r u e l r y - 6 f p r i m i t i v e s o c i e r i e si s q u i r e a s r e a l a s t h e r e r r o r o f d e s p o t i s mo,r c a p i t a l i s tc y n i c i s m ,b u t i t d o e sn o t a c t t h r o u g h t h e s i g n i f i e r .
94 Institutional PsvchotheraPv a blackhok in anythingtltat can be described,an anxiety withou" an object' the black hole But wl'richthe st:n:ioticcomponerltsno longer act or exist u'hat is^ and irnpasse' an produccs a blar:k hole, the irlpasse produces ol instance an that possibilitv the is preventecl, be lnusl ,l,,rr]ling here, and 'modern' way - in other a in operating itself, establish might cono.i.n-.. de-territorialize uords, thar ;, iigr,ilj'ing semioticmight be in a position to personological it-universal upon irnposing by every unique ;,oiir:i"noldesire in sonleu'ay couple that of deicticsl use making ail by above and ,p..ifr.,r,i,,nr, aggravatedwhen rhe rrttclau*: to the subjectof the statement This dangeris (b'v death' dreams' nature in let loose are the sienifiedwitirout any referent oldenotasvstem territorialized entire ofthe stabilitv v,itchlrafi, erc.).'1'he being repla.ced of danger is in systern semiotic group The risk. ar i:i then r.i,:n denotation' b y a s y s t e m , ; l c o n s c i e n coef,i n d i v i d u a i i z e dt' o t a l l l ' t r a n s p a r e n t -Ilhe fou'dations' verv at its threatened is utterance territoriaiized collecii",,e, The word The .TaeuariWhat has he/it l;ecome,now'that this being is dead? a word alitl', re ci.c.,laie-.in people'sheads-- a word without a corresponding life, semictic or.'n lives its that that respt,nclionlv to itself: a doubleno\^,exists pounce to point' relerellce alternatil'e sr)me uPon poinl to settle reacll'aran1.. to oltject.to underminethe dominant representatlonsr upon any atnbisr.tt-,tts machines' desiring of the of porveranclseizecontrol expr,.ipriatethe-sources .l-lte organizationof the uttelance, as n'ell as the indi'iiduation ter,.it0flnlizecl fundamentallvor c{'the subjectof the utieralce, thus seemt0 me to depend has with' production desiring thar societv given in a reiationship t!it spe,,ific. to avert in motion set tLi: more cr lcssde-territorializediluxesand the rneans thcrr. g. Collective organizations of a-signifying semiotics does not fhe s\:,tem of signs lLlses.thealltononly of its stratification'but refelringit to it merell'stops of encoding: mode the naturai fe ro tr.rrn therebv inlormation rvill be dissociatedfrom signification. the signifier.Hencelbr.tl'r of the To bJrrc,r'ua phrase of Abrahan \'{oles" it becomesa measure beopposition marked more is a There systems.s machinic r:umplexit-vlrf is clearlT i.\!'een.on tlt.- one hand, the redtrndantforms in lvhich meaning tendsto elude spelleclour anci,on the other, an informativeexpressionwhich 'understand' in the equations of to nothing ail unr.lerst:rnding(there is r , r w l l a t e \ ' ' r t c r m c x p r { s s e st h i s b e s tt r l w h o e l e r i s t a l k i n g ' ;. Or'.:lutlitcs'cr'gcar-lcvcrs' in relation to thc patterns of B. I rrusr makc it clear thar N{olesonlv envisagesthat dissociation c o m p l e x i t y ' o f am a c h i n e ( b a s e d t h e ' s t r u c t u r a i t o c o n t r a s t i s l c d h e i r . i l l u s t r a t e i r : r r : e p r i 0 ob; u i . t o w i t h t h e ' f u n c t i o n a lc o m p l e x i t ' v ' o u , l , a i i , , q r " n . 1 t i t h r v h i c hi t s v a r i o u sc o n r p o n e npt a r t sa r e u s e d ) various functions occur'l Thioie dt of on or(,tnirti (based on thc frequency with u'hich its '':\l"attt'., '' la7! P B? n t t D c n ' r t i . t h i t i g r r , 1.1,?p'i
Towards a Micro-Politics of Desire 95 theoreticalphysics).Macl-rinicinformatroneludesstructuralrepresentation; 'what addsto a representation', that is to say the improbable,the iI consistsof non-redurldant,of a rent in the labric of the flux of signs and the fluxesof things, and of the production of new conjunctions The doubles of representationare re-articulateddirectly onto production,or subsistas archaisms, traces.lost dreams.9Once the chainshave lost their univocalcharacter,the di{Ierencein value betweena reifyingdenotationand the connotationsoftht: Imaginary becomesblurred. Denotation disappearsin the face of the processdescribedby Peirceas 'diagrarlmatization',The function of re-territorializingimages,indexesand conceptsis replacedb,vthe operationof signsas the foundationfor abstract This operation machinesand the simulationof physicalrnachinicprocesses. condition of signs,this work of diagrammatization,has becomethe necessarv lor the de-territorializingmutationstl-rataffectti'refluxesof reality;no longer is there representation,but simulation, pre-production,or what one might 'transduction'.The stratum of significationdisappears;no longer are call t h e r et w o l e v e l sa n d a s ) s t e mo f ' d o u b l ea r t i c u l a t i o nt;h e r ei s o n l ) ' a c o n s t a n t return to the continuum of machinic intensitiesbased on a pluralisrn of a r r i c uI at i o n s . In this case, the points ofsubjectivation lose their function ofapparent localizationof the production of significations,and of being the arena of They no longerconstituteanything but privatizedand Oedipalizedjouissance. alongsidethe fundamental subjectiveresidues,a de-territorializedjouissance, process of machinic engagement. The imaginary individuation of representalion- the figurativeof significations- givesway to lhe figural (in Lyotard's sense)10;the fixed, syntactized,semanticizedand rhetoricized gives way to a collectiveengagementof utterance srratificationof messages with unnumbereddimensions- a de-territorializedcollectir'eengagementin which mankind no longel has pride of place.The individuatedsubjectof the utterancehas remained imprisoned in the effectsof rneaning,that is, in a re-territorializationthat has rendered itself impotent in signification.The collectiveand machinicforceof utterance,on the other hand, is producedb,va conjunction of power signs with de-territorializedfluxes. The realm of signification,as the correlateof subjectiveindividuation, is abandonedin favour of that of the machinic plane of consistency,which allows of the conjunctionof meaningand matter by bringing into play abstractmachines that are evermore de-territorializedand more closelyin contactwith material fluxesofall kinds. Significationproceededlrom the movementofconsciousg . A s r h e I r r c i i a n s s et hv c. w h i t e m e n h r v e l o s t r h e i r s o u l . I n o t h e r u o r d s . t h e i r s o u l ( r h e i r s 1 s t e r r t o f r e d u n d a n c y )h a s b e e nd e - t e r r i t o r i a l i z e dh, a s g o n e e l s e w h e r eh, a s m a d e a p a c t r v i t h t h e d e v i l ' s machinism. t o . D i x o u r s ,F r g z r aE, d i t i o n s K l i n c k s i e c k ,r g 7 r .
ct6 lnstitutional Psychotherapy nessreturnins Lrponitself,lrom a turning inrvardsto represenrati'eimages, irom a rr.rpt'r'ew'ith machinic co'junctions. A colrecti'eapparatusof utterancelnali remain meaninglessto particular people.and yet drau,its meaning (its histcricalor poeticmeaning,for instance)frorn a direct creativeconiuncn o r rr ' i r h ' i r e i l u x e sO . n t h e o r h e rh a n d .t h e i n t e r r s.co n i e n to f m e a n i n gi n ; i t A r p t l c u lp r e s rl ) r e dL r yi n d i r . i d u a t e u ( lt t e r a l t c e m a r h a v en o m a c h i n i cr i e a n ing at all, may be the occasionlor no conjunctionof real fluxes,may remain o u t ( , f i l r . r ' e a c ho f a n y p o s s i b l ee x p e r i m e n t a r i o nI .n s h o r r , r h e e q u a t i o r . ' s i ! r i f i e c i+ s i g n i f i - r= s i g . i f i c a r i o n ' a r i s ef sr o n rr h ei n d i ' i d u a t i o r o f p h a n t a sies anri lrom subjugatedgroups, whereasthe equation'coilectivero..e of utterance= machiiiic sense/'nonsense' arisesfrom group phanrasv,and the group as strlr.ject. vv'ithor-rt beingable to go into it in the necessarv depth,rvemusrnow return io this idea of .'tconjunctionbetrveensemioticmachinesand the machinesof real flux ivliich characterizenon-signifyingcollectir,,ities. we may start by noting that the semioticffuxesarejust as .eal as the material ones,anclin a sensethe nratelial fluxesarejust as senrioticas the serrioticmachines,This brings us to the idea of a semioticof intensities,a semioticof the continuous. and r"e rnr.rstdistinguish (again, as does Hjelmslev) between the nonseraioticallr'lormed rnatter-meanitig or 'purport'll and semioticallyformecl tubstancet. I{'one qives them no common basis apart lrom the dichotomv b e t i v e e nl e p r e s e n t a t i o an n d p r o d u c t i o n s, e m i o t i cm a c h i n i s m sa n d m a t e r i a l machinisrns rvill inevitably relate, the former to an idealist concept of represenrarion, anclthe latter to a reil\ringrealistconceptof production.The sameabstractr-r-rachir-rism must surelybe able to subsumeboth and enableus to pass fronr one fo the other. That abstract rnachinism in some sense 'precedes' tlre actualiziltionof the diasrar'matic conjunciionsbetvreenthe systemsof signsand ti-resystemsoimaterial intensities. The e'idencecan'ot be denied:in the sciences, the arts,politicaleconomy and so on, the sig'machines work, at least in part,directl2on the materi;l fluxes,'vhare'er nrav be the'ideological'systemof the remaining part that firncti'ns in the sphereofrepresentation.shorr ofappealing to some divine a g e n c v* s u c ha s f ) e r r i d a ' sm y t h o i t h e ' c o m p l i c i t yo f o r i g i n s ' e s t a b l i s h eadt the Ievelof a signifr,ingarche-writing- there is no meansolconceiving the corjunction of rvords and things otl-rerthan by resorting ro a svstem ol machinic kevsthat 'cross'the variousdomainswe are considering. l t The a'scrlioticallv lormed semantic or phonic reaiity is rendered by Hjelmslev's French translarors either as matihe (matter) or as sens(sense,meaning). As c)swald Ducrot poinrs out. it is u n d o r rb t e d l v t b e i a c t o f c o m i i r gl o u s v i a t h e E n g l i s hw o r d ' p u r p o r r ' r h a t e x p l ai n s t h i s b o l d s e m a n r ic oscillation benvssn 5sn5s and matter, The mind can wander olr in manv direcrions from this berinring. and. as my readers will notice, I have given mine a free range! ct'. Esais linguistiques dt Itjclmriet'. p. tl3. ancl l)ittionuire ngtclopidiqut les scintesdt langagr,p.3o.
Towards a Micro_politics of Desire 97 It seemsro me that that conjunctiontakespraceon the basis of the most de-territorializedmachinic mutations, p.ecislly those that operate at the Ie'el of the most abstractmachines,Those abstract machinesseem,in some h'av, ro constitutethe spearheadof machinic de-territorialization,prior to semioticlormationsand material fluxes.u'.rike other contents,they'arenot i'scribed in the disorder of the structuresof represencation; they'are not dependenton the spario-temporalspecifications ofthe socialphuni".y; th.y constitutein themselvesthe locusof whateverconsistency is possible'inthe inquirf inro rruth; abstract machinescrystalrizede-territoriarization; thev are its primal intensity.In the sensein which the idea of co'sistencyis usedin the axioms olmathematics, we may speakof machinic cons.isteniy; and u,g can say that, whatever the material or serniotic basis ror their present existence,they came into being on a plane ofrnachinic consistency. it is no longera questionof affirming, in lormal terms, that a sysremls non-contra_ dictory,butofexpressingthe consistency and irreversibilityofthe de-territori a l i z e dm a c h i n i c m u r a r i o n st a k i n g p l a c e u p o n t h e m a c h i n i cp h y l u m . T h e structuresof representation,in as much as they remarn cut orrrrom the rear agenciesof productiorr,oblige the semiotic machines to keep ha'ing to 'rectifr" their poinr of view to 6t in w,ithcheeconomyof materiaiflu*.r; ih.y ha'e to organizethemselvesl'ith a view to a consistency and an axiomaticor e x p e r i m e ' t a l d e r e r m i n a b i l i t y I. t i s q u i t e a d i f r e r e n t matter fbr inrensive machines,which have no need to resort to such intermediarl systems.They arein direct contactwith their own systemof encoding and ue.ificatio".T;;; are themselvestheir own truth. They art.iculate thlir logical .onsi.tency simply through their or.vnexistence.This is no longer a matrer of individual existence. but rather olindi'iduated existentbeingi, rocarizedin rererence to systemsof spatio-temporarspecifications,and in reration to observatio. svstems.Such a mode of existenceimplies that a subject and an object be constitutedexternaily to the processof de-territoriarizationhe'ce the relationshipof relativede-territorializationof time and space.with abstract machinismone startsoffrrom the viewpointof c.re-territoiialization in action, in other w'ordsreai processes ofre-mourding,mutation, brackhoresand soon. Machinesare rhus individuatedonry inihe sphereof representation; their exlstence alongsidethe sr.'stems of referentialtl.roughtis trans-individualand trans-tenrporal'A machine is no more than a machinic link, arbitrar'y rendereddiscernibleon a rree or a rhizome of machinic i_pfi."tior. ani particularmachineis arr'aysrimitedon the one hand by what iid.pu.r.r, uni on the orher by rvhat condemnsit to obsolescence. with natural encoding territoriarizednon-semiotic chains were set in operation without producing any loss of signification; for instance, the de-territorialization ofthe processofgeneticrelroduction, its ,creativit;,,, its 'innovation', took prace without seif-aurareness, rvithoui sig.nin."iir,. "ny
98
Institutional PsychotherapY
referencepoint, in short, without any instance of conscience.The same economv,the same avoidanceof any significantflight, rvould be lound with as that of insects,rvhich developsb,v semioticsof such social c<-rmmunication with no possibiliwof being transposed, way of a highly specializedencoding, and without introducingany autonomouslevelof the signifier.The establishment of a non-signifyingsemiotic rnachinism,bound up with the various processesof de-territorialization,technological,scientific,artistic, revolutionary etc., also results in desroying modes of rePresentationthat are humanistic, personological,familialist, patriotic and so on' It implies a continual broadening out of desiring production towards the totality of a-signifyingsemiotics,and their machinic surplus-values'But this doesnot thereforemeana return to the mvth of a'natural'semiotic.On the contrary',it means getting bevond semioticscentring upon human beingsand rrtoving irreversiblytorvardssemioticsinvolving technologicaland theoreticalsystems that are ever more differentiated,more artificial, and further from 'fhe problem is no longer one of trying to straddle deprimitive values. territorializedfluxes,but of getting aheadof them. There is an ever greater flux of desires,and a more marked de-territorializationof thoseSuxes The capacityof human societiesto escapefrom alienationsterritorializedin the ego,the frerson,the family, the race. the exploitationof labour,distinctionso1' sex and so on dependson a conjunctionbetweenthe semioticsofconsciousnessand thoseof de-telritorializingmachinisms.Human beingsmake love 'extra-human'elements- things,animals,images, with signsand alI kinds of looks, machines and so on - that the sexual functioning of Primates,for instance,had never encoded.With its shift to non-signiffing semiotics,the subjectivity of the utterance comes to be invested in an organlessbodv connected to a niuitiplicity of desiring intensities.That organlessbod;" oscillatesbetweenan anti-productionthat tendsto becomere-territorialized in residuaisignifications,and a serniotichyper'productionthat opensitselfto fresh machinic connections.The collective apparatus of utterance can thus become thi: centre of immanence for new desiring connections, the point by the cosmic where, beyond humanity, there is production and jouissance fluxesthat run through machinismsof every kind. Let me stressagain that this in no sensemeansthat what is utteredhas to return to the'pre-signif,ving' mechanismsof natural encoding,or that it is condemnedto bejust a single cog in an alienating social machinery. I am certainlv not going to join the vrailing chorus of humanists who lament the loss of real values,and the 'orientalized' essentialu'ickednessofindustria! societies,e'r'€rl2s thev have their rhythms to suit the styleof the'new culture'.
Towards a Micro-Politicsof Desire oo Semiotics with n articulations Signiffing semioticsestablishsystemsof mediationwhich represent,neutralrzeand renderimpotent all the intensivemukiplicities,by subjectingrhem to the_form,/substance couple.They give shapeto the substancesof expression and the substancesof the content; they impose on intensiverealities the regimeof the strataof double articulatio'.12That regimeshould,in my view, be consideredas a specificsemiotic optionol the processes ofde-territorialization. we are lacedwith a choice:either a systemrvith ,, articulationsin rvhich the various .on-signifyingsemioticscombinetheir efrortswithout any one of them over-encodingthe others; or a sysremofdouble articulation.doubre formalization.which over-encodes all other systems.If the latter, the semio_ tics beconresubjectto what one nlay call the signiiyingillusion.and all seem t o d e p e n do n l i n g u i s t i c s . rE3v e n t h e s e m i o t i cs t r a t ad e s c r i b e db v H i e l m s l e v still belong to the particular mode of formalizarion proper tc.rsignifying semiotics.I think, however, that the tripre division he suggesrsshould bi preserved,as long as it can be transposedto someexrent: form 3onsideredindependentlyof substance(which Hjelmsrevneverenvisages).This would relateto whar I call hereabstract machines; substance, or more preciselythe form/substancecouple.To the oarticular caseolthe semiologiesof signification,this wourd correspondu, u mode of actualizatiorr,manifestation,possession of the cle-territorlalizing potencyof abstractnrachinesrvhenthey becomesubjectro the s)'stemofstratification of expressionand contentbasedon the principleofdouble articulation; malter,consideredindependentl;of its signifyingsernioticformation (rhisis not envisagedbv Hjelmslev,either,lor in his way of thinking it would implv leavingrhesemiotic sphere).It would rhenstandas a corresponde nt to *,hat i call the machinicmeaning.In the contextof a semioticof the machinicsense, rather than of the signification,of material intensitiesrather than of the signifieras a categoryin itself,ofcollectiveapparatusofutterancerather than an individuation of the subjectbasedon the primacy or the statemenr,what would vanish would be the very distinctionbetweencontentand exDression. This may be the way in which we are to undersrandHjelmslev,s(or his translators'?) intuition in idenrifyingmarter and meaning. In the specificcaseof double articurarionsignifvingmachines,we are in a t r . c i c h r i s r i a n I I e r z ' s a n a l y s i s ,w i r h r e f e r e n c et o H j e l n r s l e v ' sp r o l e g o m i n e s . . , L e r us rerurn ro chapter r 3 o[the Prolegomines, r'here it savs rhat rorm is a pure nerwork o[rc]ationships, thar marter t h c r ec h r i s t c n e d" s e n s e " ) r e p r c s e n t st h e i n i t i a l l y a m o r p h o u se n r i r y i n w h i c h l o r m i s i n s c r i t r e , l and "manilested"a . n d t h a r t h e s u b s t a n c ei s w h a r a p p e a r sw h e n o n e p r o j c c r sl o r m o n t o m a r t e r , , a s a ner t h a ti s s t r e r c h e do u t p r o j e c t si r s s h a d o wo n t o a n u n b r o k e ns u r f a c e "( p . gr T h i s m c r a p h o r s e e m sr o ). m ea \ / e r yc l e a r o n e : t h e " u n b r o k e n s u r f a c e "i s t h e m a r t e r , t h e " o u t s t r e t c h e dn e t ' , i s t h e f o r m , and thr"shadorv"olthenerisrhesubstance.'(Metz,Langageetcin[ma,Larousse,rgTr.) I q . C f . B e n v 6 n i s t e , S e m i o t i tc9a6, 9 , r . z , M o u t o n .
roo
Institutional Psychotherapy
scnsesub!ecterlto a controlledCe-territorialization. The anti-productionof significationand sLrbjectivation partiall,vre-territorializesthe semioticprocess.Ii is not a questionofradical neutralization,ho*'ever:the semioticsof significationalsoimplv settingon loot a de-territorialization of consciousness rvl'richr,vill continue to plav a leading role in the most adr.'anced,most artificial,moslnodern, most scientificmachinic conjunctions-In the caseof senriotics'with n number of articulations)one a politicri o1'nr:-rn-signifying wiil tirus preservea certain partiai use lor signifyingsemiologies. Thel'will rhen function in :pite of their re-territorializingeffectsof significationand 'fhey u'ill rnerely lose their function of over-encodingthe subjecti'.'ation. systemsof'sernioticproduction that used to lall under the despoti.sm of the signifier. as I am trying to, twci semiotic politics, I u,ant to In di.stirreuisiring. deterrnineurrder what conditionscertain semioticareas- in sciences,arts, revolution, sexuality, etc. - could be removed from the control of the could get beyondthe svstemofrepresentationas Cominant representations, such -- since that s),stemseparatesdesiringproduction from production ibr exchange,and alierratesit as prevailingproductionrelationsdemand. Lct us look asain at the three tvpesofsynthesiswe usedin order to identifv and articulateproduction and representation: what is set going by the processesof r " At the lev,:l of connecliue ,)nlheses, uon-scmioticencodingis tl-reabstractmachines- that is, machinicprocesses 'doing' 'thinking', and indepenCent of dichotomies between between fepresentationaud production.The machinics€nsemust here be understood in vectorialterms:the senseindicatesa mode of polyvocalconnectionamong the machinic fluxes.Multiplicities of intensitycannotbe lumped togetheror territorializedaiong any one systemofsignification.Each producesits own and this production of meaning,which does not contain the spercifications, processitself but developsas it were alongsideit, trans"'ersalli'. outside all systemsof representation,is noneother than what we havedesignatedas the organlessi:ody. r. With disjunctite slnthr.rrr,the formalism of representationis establishedin pride of place. Particular signil\,ingsubstancestake over the functioningof a[.rstract machines;they take contlol. organizeand 'discipline'the connective Though in their conscious,destructiveaspectthev are machinesof svntheses. de-territorialization,they are at the sametime structuresof re-territorialization becauseofthe systemofdouble articulationthat producestheir e{Iectsof one movesback significationand subjectivation.With disjunctivesyntheses, and forth benr,eenthe dead end of iconic impotentization and a deten-itorializing diagrammatization capable of being reconnectedto rhe synthesis. connecti\re
Torvardsa Micro-poliricsof Desire ror 3. At this point of departure, the conjunctiue s,ntheses define the srarus of subjecti'ation' In the case of signifving se*iologi.s, subjectivarion is individuated, split up by the signifie., re,ide.ed impotent; the subject becomessimply somerhingalongsidethe.signilyingsubstances. All poivuocity of u tteranceis alienatedto a,ranscenden"talized; subject of the utterance. In the case of non-signifying semiotics, there is a collectiverorce o' urterancethat effectsthe split inherent i'ajl systems of representation. The sen.re of the abstracr machines connectsup with rhe sensi of the collective apparar.sesofutterance,^bothprior ro and beyond the exclusivedisjunctive signi6cationsolthe signifyingsemiorogies with their errectof individu"tino subjecti'ity. Thus the collectiveappararuses of utrerance^"d ;-J;.;i;; effecta co'junction betu'eenthe abstiact machines on the one hand, a'd on the orher the machinesthar are a*ua.lized in the fluxes of reality and the lluxes ol'a-signifling signs. The specific effect of the annihilati"g J;t e r r i r o r i a l i z a t i oonf t h e i n s t a n c eo f c o n s c i e n c e b e c o m e sl n s o m es e n s ei s o iated from subjectivizing significations. A machine of intensive deterrrroria,izationis a gatewayfor the flux of signs, and gi'es them new power bv liberating them from representationa.r cleadenclsancl i'volving th.- i,, processes of diagramrnaticconjunction.To transposeit inro rhe te;irr;io;y used b' Andr6 Martinet. the problem can be stated like this: the .,.ron..n?. srructuredon the level ofthe first articulationand the phonemesstructurei on the le'el ofthe secondarticurationare not in essencediirbrent.Both are g e n e r a t e d*,o m o u t o f t h e s a m ec o n l i n u u m ,b y a , d u a l c o n s t r a i n t ,b, y h ; ; ; ; to respondto tr'o diferenr typesof fbrmarization. This givesus ,-o',,"f., o? production:things signified,which are classified, paradigmatized,rendered im.po.tent; and signifiers,which are policedund ,y.,tugmurrzed. But, outside thisdual efrectof significarion,a new rypeofa-signifying oiag.ammaiicrin; oi escapehas becomepossible. A direct semioticrelationshipcan norvbe estabiished betweenrhematter of expression and the abs*act machines.Henceforth,the traditionai distincrion betweenrhe expressionor signifierand the conrent or u,hatis signifiedtends to sto,pbeing obviously necessary.The expressio n of a macltinic sri* no* ,ut .. r n ep l a c eo t ( r) the svstemofsignificationbasedon the duality ofsignifierancrsignified; ( a ) r h e s y s r e mo l r e p r e s e n r a t i o bn a s e do n t h e i u a l i t y o f s u b s r a n i ea n d .
IOrm:
(q) the articulationof both thesesystemsas a mode of subjectivationthat prevents anv direct contact with the referencethat is, the intensive m u l t i p l i c r t vo f m a t e r i a li n t e n s i t i e s . In this respecc,it may be held that rhe s'srem ofrelerential thinking has never been basically anything but one flnal barrier, one last d.rpirut.
r02
Institutional Psychotherapv
atlempt to pre\ierlt the evcr more threatening prolileration of abstract t n r a c l r i n efsr o r n' h t c e n t r a ln r a c h i n i cs t e m . ' T'he two dua.lities- signified/signifier.substancelform- were subjectivatrng; the expressiveduality - matter/absfact machine - implies a doesnot coilectiveuttering force. But, let me repeat,that de-subjectivation 'human' semiotics.Even supposingthar the despotisrnof thereb-vinvalidate the signifier were to be abolished,signifying languageswould still have a crucial role to piav as the means of containing the processesof retelritorialization,and io sive the machinic spearheadsofde-territorializawe shouldeive freerein to tion ti'reirlLrllfbrce.That is *'hy in schizo-ar-ralysis in order representations and paranoid-fascistrepresentations, Oedipalizir-rg the better to countei their tendencyto block the fluxes.and to start things going again in a kind of machinicforward rush. 'Ihe perspectii'eI am suggestingimpliesa fundamentalreversalof perspecof semioticcomponents, tive. \Ve are abandoningthe lbrmal classifications and instezrdare primarilv consideringthe kind of working organizationsthe-v constitute-*in view of specificsystemsof de-territorializingfluxes.The sign of de-territorializationat work withiu the machinestakepart in the processes central n'rachinicphylum. Indeed there is no further need to establisha clear-cut distincticn between- say - a diagrammatizationof signs and a 'natural' fluxes, or technologicalinnovation, or a scientific mutation ol 'artificial' machines.\f ith both 'nature' and signs,we are concernedwith the sanletype of machinismand the samesemioticof material intensities. Oppositions between nature and culture, signs and things, spirit and matter, theory and technologv,etc. appeared to make senseonly in the contex'rol'asemiologv6fsignificationthat setout to classify,control,turn into 'contents'it extracted clearly defined and specifiedobjects all the various l u x e so f s f d e - t e r r i t o r i a l i z ef d s l i n t e n s i t y , l 5T h e e f f e c t o liorn thr multiplicirieo electrons,fiuxes of signs,of experimentalcombinations.of iogic machines antl so on combine to give a rvide expansionto de-territorializingconjunctions, and set the abstractmachineslree from the despotismofthe strata of signifiers. 1 4 . i U e t z b c l i c v r s t h a t C h o m s k , vt o s o m e e x t e n t g e t s b e y o n d H j e l m s l e r ' ' so p p o s i t i o nb e t u ' e e n 'fhc Chomskians refer to a'logic machine' prior to ihe text. and capabie of rxpression anci conlent, generaringit. which would overcome thc opposirion between the lorm ofthe content and the form of 'I thc expression. his is .something that merits more proibund consideration.But it seemsto me, at firsr sighr, rhat such a logic rrachine is still restricted to the semioticsofsigni{ication, and uould nct rrake it possible to e{lict the passageto the absract machines which are to be lound prior, not merely to the wri rten word, but to all machinic manifestationsof every kind, The same mav be said o{'thc system o[abstract objects suggestedby S. K. Saumjan's'Generative Applicative Model'' r 5 . I t m a y b e a n i n t u i t i o n o f t h i s s o r t t h a t l e a d sC h r i s r i a n M e t z t o s u g g e s ta n a n a l y s i so f t h e rclevant fcatures ol the material ofexpression, or to oppose the categoru ofexprcssiorr to that oi s i e n i f i c a t i o nB , u t i n m l , v i e w h e i s w r o n g , w h e n s r u d v i n gt h e c i n e m a ,t o c o n t i n u et o t a l k a b o u t t h e narfer oftlre rign1fitr,rather than to use Hjelmslev's phrase, the matter ofrrpr:srion.
Tou'ards a Micro-Politics of Desire
r03
N'{achinicconjuncrionswill find their meaning,wil be ,guided, in their de-territorializing intensitv as much from a flux oi'erecrons as from a flux of equationsor axioms. I must stressthat this does not mean a return to the 'origins': on the contrary, the establishmentof a colrectiveuttering fiorce implies that we conrinueto passby way of the narrow ,defires,of the si-gnifier and the'schizzes'ofindividuated subjectivation.But this time, it i, ul pure means- rvithoutany transcendenta.l dimension,without anv paralysingelrect on the historicalprocesses ofde-territorialization. It may be usefulhere to give a few examplesof abstractmachines. Thesg may be iogical machines set i' motion by the sciences, or formulae of transversality'unleashed'in the courseofhistory,as for instance in the sphere of war machines or religion machines.But machinism of this kind' atsr.r proliferates ar the microscopic level. consider whar we call ar the La Borde clinic the grid: in all the various lorms and stagesof its existence, it involves the emergenceofan abstractmachine.The problem was to connect the fiuxes of time, of Iabour,of functions,of mone;'und .o on, on a rather differentmodc from the one normally prevailingin other establishments of the samekind which can be characterizedby the existenceofa relatively staticorganogram of function. The work time-iabie - written down on paper - the cirJurati"onof lunctions inscribed in a semiologyofgestures,the modification ofhierarchical catesoriesinscribedin ajuridical and socialsemiology,all theseare specific manilestationsof the sameabstractmachinismthat conveys a certain (locar, and not very important) mutation in productionreiations. And it may have been becausethis sort ofmachinism had begun to appear at La Borde ihat so much fuss was made about our experimentsthere.r6Another example of abstract machines is the love rituals that characterize different p..iodr. Courtiy love,saysRendNelly, inrroduceda radicallynew organization of the relationshipsbetweenmen and women in the context of the feudal caste system. The semiotic of romantic love, in its turn, independent of the significationsand sentimentsit expresses, seemsto me to correspondmore to settingup a certain kind of relationshipto childhood, to making use of the intensitiesand territorialitiesof childhood in what I have caleJ,childhood blocks',as opposedto consciouschildhoodmemories.(That this is a casenot merely of significative themes but of setting in motion a non_signifying intensive machine is demonstrated by' the Jecisive part played [y .u.fr childhoodblocksin rhe music of a composerlike Schumann.t The Power Relationships
within the Utterance
The functionof languageis not sorelyto serveas a channei of transmissionfor fluxesof inlormation. Languagesare not mere supports to communication r6, Cf. the special number ofthe revtew Rcchcrches devotedto La Borde, no. z r, April r g76.
rcl4 Institutional Psychotherap,v amorlg individuals;they are inseparablefrom the socialand politicai context in whir:h the-vare used.What could be calledarbitrarv in the rclationshipof signification(the relationshipbetneenthe signifierand the thing signified)is o n l v a p a r t i c u l a rr n a n i f e s t a t i o9nf t h e a r b i i r a r i n e s os f p o w e r .T h e d g m i n a n t l a n g u a q ei s a l w a v s t h e l a n g u a g eo f t h e d o m i n a n t c l a s s :t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t makes use of signifying semiotics,but, essentiallv,u'hat makes it tick is a non-signi{vingsemiotics.Linguists like Oswald Ducrot are thereloreled to 'devaiuethe facilemetaphor that assimilateslanguagesand codes,and so to qualif1,.or evenaltogetherden;-the definitionof languageas an instrumentof c o m r n u n i c a t i o n ' .P l r r o m i s i n go, r d e r i n g a, d v i s i n ge. i v i n ga n a s s u r a n c ep,r a i s ing, taking seriousiyor lightlv, snerringand so on areas much micro-political as thel, are linguisticactivities.To a greateror lesserextentthc;-are all what A u s t i n c a l l s ' i l l o c u t i o n a r t ' a c t i o n sE' .v e r l 's t a t e m e nct a n t h u s b e r e i a t e dt o a p a r t i c u l r r s t r a t i i l c a t i o n0 1 - L l t t e r a n caer,r a n g e db \ r a n k . c a s t e 'c l a s s T h e r e fore an1,questioningof the statusof the collectiveapparatusesol urterance would impl,v a re{ttsal to tailor the mode of utterance to the statements Lrttered.and a considerationofthe stratificationsolutteranceas b1'no means l e c l u c i h i es r m p i y t o l i n e u i s t i cs u h s t a n c e sB. e , v o n dt h e m e s s a q ees x p l i c i t l v the analvsisw'or:ldhave to con'siderthe and specificalll'r.rttered, expre,ssed n o n - s i g n i f v i n gs e n r i o t i cd i m e n s i o n sr - r n d e r l y i n gi l,l u m i n a t i n g a n d d e c o u sructing ever)-discourse.Its aim rvouldnot be so much to trv to expressit all in terms of the text and the signifier. but to understand the true power of desire. situatrono{ lbrces,in other words the machinicengagements 'lhc establishmentLrsessignif,vingsemiotics,but never losesitself comto imagine that it could fall victim plctely in them, and it would be a n.ristake to its ou'n signifling methods and ideologies.The ruling classesfoster the developrnentof signifying behaviour. Indeed' this constitutesone basis of t h ei r p o r v e rb, u t i t i s o n l y a m a t t e ro f u s i n gs e m i o t i ci n s t r u m e n t os 1 ' t h iksi n d t o 'rlruq' pecrpleu'ho are alreadysubjugatedin other \4'avs-at the leveloftheir relationshipsof desireproduction and of econotnicproduction There are two methods of approaching an ideologicalsemiotic: one, starting lrom a position of real poln'er(the power of the State. or of a traditional political movement),tries to determinewhat dominant significat i o n s s h o u l d b e p r o d u c e da s a t e c h n i q u eo f s e n l i o t i ci m p o t e n t i z a t i o ntlh e orl)er,starting on the contrarl'lrom ideology,or e\rena critique ofideologl', tnes to corne to terms with reality. In the latter case there is a kind of simulation of real intensities,one is lulled by fine statementsand grandiose reformistpartiesand othersu'ho seekto programmesin the tamiliar st1'lec-rf The politicsof sienificationconsists porver, real bases olpolitical the c<.liceal ir: developing a rvhole s.vstemof confusing the machinic sense,and in r 7. Osrvald Ducrot, Dtre el nepasdire,Hermann, t972, P. 2+.
Towards a Micro-Politicsof Desire r05 producinga multitude of archaismsin the subjectiveterritorialitiesthat reify utterance and split it between the two lormalized strata of content and ion. express The result of this is to block the semioticpraxis of the masses- of all the various oppresseddesiring minorities - and to prevent their entering into direct contact with material or semiotic fluxes,preventingtheir becoming connectedup to the de-territorializinglinesof the difl'erentsortsof machinism and so threateningthe balance of establishedpower, Referentialthought, understanding,interpretation,the transcendentalizing oldistinct, concrete objects,and dogmatism all proceedfrom the same method of subjectir.rg peopleto the dominant statementsand significations.Every statementhas to be understoodwithin the pre-established area of exclusivebi-polar values, and everv semioticsequencehas to leavethe realnr of its original machinic lormation to enter the systemsof o{ficial expressionof significationand fepresen tation.II In mv view it would be wrong to acceptan oppositionbetweenscienceand ideolog,v, especiallyin the obsessional mode of the Althusserians,who make that opposition massive,schematicand without any real relation to ll{arx. We can expect no salvation frorn any all-embracing scienceor (totally mythical) scientificit,vof conceptsor theoriesconsideredindependentlyof their technico-experimentalcontext and their situation in history. The relationshipbetweenscienceand politics cannot be one ofdependence.Of courseboth proceedlrorn sirnilar kinds of collectiveeconomicand social engagements,but their semiotic productionsare directed along radically differentlines. Scientificstatements(in the context ofcurrent scientificproducrionrelations) are a kind of natural product of the field of logico-mathematical formalism.r,u'hereas politicalstatements(takingpoliticsin the usualsense,not in that of the micro-politicsof desire) are systematicallyreduced to match personological,lamilial and humanist statements.In the circumsrances, it is rather over-generousto allow science- in fac!, a certain mythology of science- the exclusiveprivilegeof being the sourceof ruth, the solecentre ofall de-territorializations. And it would drag 3oliticsevendeeperinto a dead end to try to reduce it to a sheer ideological exerciseif it should reluse to submit to the injunctionsof the epistemologists. We must thereforedeny that thereis any radical epistemologicalbreak betweena conceptualfield ofthe purely scientific,and an ideologythat is purely illusory and mystificatory. The moment the discourseof sciencebecomesa discoursenDozlscience(and the dividing line is impossibleto deterniinefor certain rvhenit comesto the r8.'fhe axioms of referenlial thought have been analysed by Gilles Deleuze (in Dffirence el ripy'tition) around, four themes: identit] in the concept, timilitude in rhe perception, anulogl in the judgement and rygotioninthe position ofexistencc.
r06
lnstitutional PsychotheraPY
voices that actuall,v speak lor science,so onl,v the epistemologistscan contraclictus) it autotnaticallv makes itself an ideologi'. that is to sav a . o n v e r s e l yw, h a t s e t o u t a s i d e o l o g i ecsa t ra c q u i r e s e n r i o t i co l s i g n i 6 c a t i o n C and havedecisivesocial. can be'scientificallV'manipulated real effbctiveness, In short, I believeit to be quite absurd economicand material conseqlencesto rr),to baserevolutionarypoliticson scieltce.The sciencecited by scientific Marxists doesnot exist; it is an imasinarv sciencethat operatesonly in the or] the other hand, I do not think it absurd to rvritings of episremoloeists. on semioticand analvticalexercisesthat have politics base a revolutionarv broken with the clominantsemiologr';in other words, on wa-vsof using the spokenand written word. pictures,gestures,groups and so on, that would clirectak:ng verv diflerentlinesthe relationshipbenveenthe flux ofsigns and all the de-territorializedfluxes.In point offact. it is bv getting caught up in that the massesfaii to reaiizethe true the ner of interpretativesemio.logies spr.ingsof rheir power - that is their real control over industrial.technologic' al, scientillc,economicand socialsemiotics-and becomeboggeddou'n in the phantasiesof the dominant realitr',and in the modesof subjectilation anc repressionofdesire imposedupon them by the bourgeoisie Horvevermuch scientificsemioticsmay be contaminatedby the dogmasof religionand philosophv,thev remain as a wtole basedon a machinicpolitics In thc last resort, what matters is always the engagementsof signs and of complexes.whereasfinal obiectives,interpretations technico-experimental place But here and graphic representationsalways end by taking secor-rd practice scientific guaralltee of no protection, automatic is 1o agaip, there cag often againstinterpretativeaberrations,a1d, as rve hale seen,scientrsrs tirtlowsuch aberrationsrvith nothing short ofmystical lervour. To conclude nry remarks about the apparatusesof utierance, a few commentsabout the semioticsof art. In this sphere,things are lessclear-cut; 'take-overbv the signifier'ofthework. the artist, the inspiration'the rhereis a . e t i t s e e m st h a t , o v e ra l l , o n e n ) a vs a v t h a t m o d e r na r t i s t a l e n t ,t h c g e n i u s Y evolvinc towards a politics of non-significance:representationaland maof encodedexPress.vstems chinicenqagernents aregaitringoverrepresentative sion. Bur if we look more closelyat the varioussortsof collectiveengagement, we irave to qualifi' that statement.Tl-restereotypedimage we have of, sa-v,a painter, is of an individual more than usuallv open to sociallife. We picture hirn rvith his lriendsin the cal6,for instance.He will probably be a member of a school, and will almost certainlv be more politically involved than a composerwould. Indeed we tend to seethe composeras a solitarycharacter, wrestlingin a dizzying singlecombat with a musicalcreationthat he cannot \'et it is noteworthythat, rvitl-rfew exceptions.composershave quite captr-rre. tended torvardsa delenceof traditionalvalues,tou'ardsreligion,even aln'a-vs committowardssocialreaction.Indeed in their o\{;nway the)'areextremel,v
Towards a Micro-Politics of Desire
r07
ted people.One cannotthereforecling to one'sfirst impressionof the painter If we as a man in societyand the composeras representingtranscendence. examinethe natureof the collectivestructuresto which the two belong,rather than their individual attitudes,the paradoxis confirmed. \'{usicalproductionoriginatesin extremelylargecollectivities;it implies a major divisionof labour, and is supportedby a long musicaltradition. Every composerrvritesasan extensionof what hasgonebefore,anci,though he may introduceexcitingnew ideas,he hasstill to dependon a wholetechnologyand a whole professionalworld for his work to be presented.Composersbelong to a kind of castewirh its own highly elaboraterituals,a castewhosepositionin the hierarchyolreactionarypowersis not negligibie.(Painters,ofcourse,are connectednot so much r+'ithchepowersofthe aristocracyas thoseolfinance.) One has here to contrastthe abstractmachinesof music (perhapsthe most non-signifyingand de-territorializingof alll) with the whole musical caste its educationaltraditions, its ru.lesfor correct svstem- its conservatories, composition,its stresson the impresarioand so on. It becomesclearthat the collectivity of musical production is so organized as to hamper and delay the lorceof de-territorializationinherent in music as such,We may think hereof the history of the church's relationshipwith music, which goesback to the origin of polyphony. For instance, the church always tried to block the machinicexpansionof instrumentalmusic,and to allow only singing.It tried to set dogmatic limits to composition,and to impose particular stylesand forms.On the other hand, one of what Christian Metz calls the'outstanding be the lact that featuresolthe subject-matterof pictorialexpression'may r'r,ell the painter, contrary to all appearances, is far more solitary than the composer.ls He is lar lessaflectedby tradition and the schools.Musical forms overwhelmthe listener,capturing, directing,conlrolling. A canvas,on the other hand, remainsat a distancefrom the art-lover- who can pick it up, put it down, glance at it, pass it by aitogether.The painter, the work and the spectatorremain in a sensefundamentallyseparatefrom one another.In the final analysis,the collectivelorcesconstitutedby the plasticarts are far less 'human' and more machinic than are thoseof music,which evenin their most modern forms are infused with a politics of signifying redundancy. Though painting is nranifestlymore territorializedthan music, the painter himselfis far more de-teritorialized than the composer.
rg. C[ Alberto Nloravia's novel, La noia.
Towards a New Vocabularv
Machine and Structure'
The distinction I am proposing betweenmachine and structure is based solely on the way we use the words; we may considerthat we are merely dealingwith a 'written device'of the kind one has to invent for dealingwith a mathematicalproblem.or with an axiom that ma1'haveto be reconsidered at a particular stageof development,or againwith the kind of machinewe shall be talking about here. I want thereforeto make it clearthat I am putting into parentheses the lact that, in realitv,a machineis inseparablefrom its structuralarticulationsand, conversely,that each contingentslructure is dorninated(and this is what I want to demonstrate)by a systemof machines,or at the very leastby one logic machine.It seemsto me vital to start by establishingthe distinctionin order to make it easierto identif,vthe peculiarpositionsof subjectivityin relationto eventsand to history.2 We may say of structurethat it positionsits elementsby way of a systemof references that rel.tes eachone to the others,in such a wav that it can itselfbe relatedas an elementto other structures. The agent of action, whose definition here does not extend beyond this principle of reciprocal determination, is included in the structure. The structuralprocessofde-totalized totalizationenclosesthe subject,and will
r . l n i t i a l l y i n t e n d e dl o r t h e F r e u d i a n S c h o o li n P a r i s i n r 9 6 9 , a n d p u b l s h e d i n C h a n g en, o . t e ( S e u i l )r, 9 7r . r. To adopt the categoriessuggestedby Gilles Deleuze,structure, in the sensein which I am using it here, would relate to the generality characterized by a posirion oiexchange or substitution of p a r t i c u l a r i t i c sw , h e r e a s t h e m a c h i n e w o u l d r e l a t e t o t h e o r d e r o f r e p e t i t i o n ' a s b e h a v i o u ra n d '1D viewpoint rel a t ive to a singul ari ty tha t can not be changedor replaccd' fJ,ire.nu et ripitition,Presses Universitaires de France, I 969, p. 7). Of Deleuze's three minimum conditions determining strucrurein general, I shall retain only the first two: (r)Theremustbeatleasttwohetcrogeneousseries,oneofwhichisdefinedasthesignifierandrhe orheras the signi6ed. (c) Each of these series is made up of terms that exist oni1, through their relationship with one another. His third condition, 'tx,o heterogeneousseriesconvergingupon a paradoxical element that actsso as to di{lerentiare them', relates,on thc contrary, exclusivelyto the order of the machine (Logiquedu s a r oM , inuit, t969,p.63).
I 12 f'owards a Nerv Vocabularv n o t l e rs o a s l o n ga si t i s i n a p o s r t i o nt o r e c u p e r a t iet w i t h i n a n o t h e rs t r u c t u r a l determinatior.r. 'fhe n r a c h i n eo, n t h eo l h e r h a n d ,r e m a i n se s s e n t i a l lrve m o t e{ i o m t h e a g e n t 'fhe -fe o{ action. sLrbjectis alrval,ssomer,r,here else. mporaiizationpenetrates the machineon all sidesand can be related to it onl,vzrfterthe lashionof an evenrT , h e e m e r g c n c oe l ' t h ci n a c h i n en r a r k sa d a t e ,a c h a n g ec, l i f l e r e nf tr o m a structLlralrepresentatiolr. 'fhe history of technologvr.sdated bv the existencear each srageol a i ) a r t i c u i a rt 1 ' p eo f ' n i a c h i n et ih e h i s t o r \o f t h e s c j e n c eiss n o w r e a c h i n ga p o i n t , i n a l l i t s b r a n c h e sw , h e r e e v c r vs c i e n t i 6 ct h e o r ) ' c a nb e t a k e na s a m a c h i n e rzrthel than a strlicture, rl'hich relates it to the order of ideoiogr'.Everv (almostto the point machineis the negation.the destro;-erby ir-rcorporation o f e x c r e t i o n ) o, f ' t h e r n a c h i n ei t r e p l a c e sA. n d i t i s p o t e n t i a l l ,ivn a s i m i l a r r e l a t i o n s h i pt o t h e m a c h i n et h a t w i l l t a k ei t s p l a c e . Yesterdav'smachine, today's and tomorrow's, are not reiated in their structur?11 determinations:onlv by a processof historicalanal;-srs,by referr:ncetr) a signifling chain extrinsic to the machine, bv what u,e mrght call historical structur;rlism, can we gain anv overail grasp of the ei}'ectsof c o n t i n u i t v .r e l r o - a c t i o na n d i n t e l l i n k i n st h a t i t i s c a p a b l eo f ' r e p r e s e n t i n g . For the rnachrne,the subjectof history is elsewhere,in the structure. In I z r c tt,h e s u b j e c o t f t h e s t r u c t u r ec. o n s i d e r eidn i t s r e l a t i o n s h i o p f a l i e n a t i o nt o ;1s,vstemtrf cle-totalizedtotalizarion.shouid rather be seenin relation ro a of-'beingan ego'- the egoherebeingin contrastwrth the sub.ject ;;'henorrrcnon o i ' t h e t r n c o n s c i o uass i t c o r r e s p o n d st o t h e p r i n c i p l es t a t e d b y L a c a n : a s i q n i 6 e r - r e n r e s e ni t sl b r a n o t h e rs i g n i f i e rT. h e u n c o n s c i o ussu b j e c ta s s u c h will bc on the same side as the machrne,or better perhaps.alongside the r n a c h r r r cT.h e r ei s n o b r e a ki n t h em a c h i n ei t s e l f :t h e b r e a c hi s o n e i t h e r s i d eo f lt.
The indir.'idual'srelationto the machinehas beendescribedbv sociologists fi>llowingFriedn-rannas one of lundamentalalienatjon,This is undoubtedl,v true ii one considersthe individual as a structure for totalization of the irnasirarl'. But the dialecticof the mastercraftsmanand the apprenticeJrhe r.,ldpicrurcsof the clillelenttradesflourishingin dillerenrpartsof the countrv, in the faceof modern mechanizedindustry ail this has becomemeaningl.ess tlrat rcqLliresics skilled rvorkersto start lrom scratchagain ru'irhevel'\'new technoltrgical advance. But doesnot this startingliom scratchmark precisely that essentiaibreakthroughthat characterizes the unconscioussubject? Initiation into a trade and becomingacceptedas a skilledrvorkerno longer takes piace by wav of institutions,or at least not those envisagedin such s t a t e m e n t sa s ' t h e s k i . l lh a s p r e c e d e n coev e r t h e m a c h i n e ' ,W i t h i n d u s t r i a l capitalism. the spasrnodicevolution of machirrerykeepscr-rttingacrossthe c x i s t i n qh i e r a r ,l r v o f s k i l l s .
Machine and Structure I l3 In this sense,the worker'salienationto the machineexcludes him lrom any kind of structuralequilibrium, and puts him in a positionwhere he is as close as possibleto a radical svstemof realignment,rve might sav of castrarion, wherehe losesall tranquillity, all 'sellconfirming'security,all thejustificarionofa'senseofbelonging'to a skilledtrade.Suchprolessionalbodiesasstill exist,like doctors,pharmacists,or lawyers,aresirnplysurvivalsfrom the days of pre-capitalistproductionrelations. This changeis ofcourseintolerable;instirutionalproductionthereforesets out to concealwhat is happening by setting up systemsof equivalents,of imitations.Their ideologicalbasis is to be lound not solely in fascist-type, paternalisticslogansabout work, the lamily and patriotism,but alsowithin thevariousversionsofsocialism (evenincluding the most apparentlyliberal ones,like the Cuban), w,ith their oppressivemyth of the model worker, and theirexaltationof the machinewhosecult has much the samefunctionas that o l t h e h e r oi n a n t i q u i t y . As cornparedwith the work done by machines,the work of human beingsis nothrng.This working at 'nothing', in the specialsensein w,hichpeopledo it todav,r,vhichtends more and more to be merely a responseto a machinepressinga red or black button to producean effectprogrammedsomewhere else- human work, in other words, is only the residuethat has not yet been integratedinto the w'orkof the machine. Operations performed by workers, techniciansand scientistswill be absorbed,incorporated into the workings of tomorrow's machine; to do somethingover and over no longeroffersthe securityofritual. It is no longer possibleto identif. the repetition of human actior.Is('the noble task of the sower')with the repetitionof the natural cycleas the loundationolthe moral order.Repetitionno longer estabiishesa man as someonewho can do that particularjob.Human work today is merelya residualsub-wholeof the work of the machine. Tfris residual human activity is no more than a partial procedurethat accompaniesthe central procedureproducedby the order of themachine.The machinehasnow cometo theheartofdesire,and thisresidual humanwork representsno more than the point of the machine's imprint 'a'3). onthe imaginary world of the individual (cf. Lacan's functionof the Everv new discovery in the sphereof scientificresearch,lor examplemovesacrossthe structuralfieid oftheorv like a w,armachine,upsettingand rearranging everythingso as to changeit radically.Even the researcheris at themercyof this process.His discoveriesextendlar beyondhimself,bringing in their train u,holenew branchesofresearchers,and totally redesigningthe treeof scientificand technologicalimplications.Even when a discoveryis calledby its author's name, the result,far lrom 'personalizing'him, tends to 3. SeeGlossar.v,Ohjelpetil
'a'.
lr,r
r 14 Towards a New Vocabulary be to turn his proper name into a cornmonnoun! The questionis whetherthis eflacing of the individual is something that will spread to other forms of productionas weli. Though it is true that this unconscioussubjectivity,as a split which is overcome in a signifying chain, is being transferred away lrom individuals and human groups towards the world of machines,it still remainsjust as un-representable at the specificallymachinic level. It is a signilierdetached from the unconsciousstructural chain that will acI as representallue to represent the machine. The essenceof the machine is preciselythis lunction ofdetaching a signi6er as a repr€sentative.as a'di{Ierentiator', as a causal break, di{ferent in kind lrom the structurally establishedorder of things. It is this operation that binds the macirineboth to the desiringsubjectand to its statusas the basisof r the various structurai orders correspondingto it. The machine,as a reperition I of the particuiar, is a mode - perhapsindeed the onlv possiblemode - of i univocal repfesentationof the various forms of subjectivitvin the order ofi generalityon the individual or the collectiveplane. i In trying to see things the other wav round, startinglrom the general, one i would be deluding oneselfwith the idea that it is possibl"to baseoneselfon sonlestructural spacethat existedbeforethe breakthroughby the machine. This'pure', 'basic'signifvingchain,a kind oflost Eden ofdesire,the'goodold days' before mechanization,rnight then be seen as a meta-language,an absoluterelerencepoint that one could alwaysproducein placeofany chance eventor specificindication. 'Ihis would lead to wronglv locating the truth of the break, the truth of the subject,on the level of representation,information, communication,social codesand ever)'otherlorm ofstructural determination. T'hevoice, asspeechmachine,is the basisand determinantolthe structural order oi language,and not the other way round. The individual, in his bodiliness,acceptsthe consequencesofthe interaction ofsignifying chains of all kincis which cut across and tear him apart. Th€ human being is caught where the machine and the structure meet. Human groups have no such projection screen available to them. The rnodes of interpretation and indication open to them are successiveand contradictory, approximative and meraphorical, and are based upon di{Iererit structural orders, for instance on myths or exchanges. Every change produced by the inrusion of a machine phenomenon will thus be accom. panied in them with the estabiishment of what one may call a system of anti-production, the representativemode specificto structure. I need hardly say that anti-production belongs to the order of the machine:the keynotehere is its characteristicofbeing a subjectivechange, which is the distinctive trait of ever),order of production. What w'e need
tr)A^a/J2_
'1'aiY J. 'ti ?^tn"t
Machine and Structure I I5 thereloreis a meansof finding our way r.r,ithoutmoving as though by magic from one plane to another.We must, lor instance,relateto the samesystemof productionboth what goeson in the worid ofindustry, on the shopfloor or in the manager'sofFce,and what is happeningin scientihcresearch,and indeed in the world of literatureand evenof dreams, Anti-production rvill be, among other things, what has been described 'production relations'.Anti-production will tend to e{Iecta under the term in the directionof kind ofre-tilting of the balanceofphantasy,not necessarily inertia and conservatism,sinceit can alsolead to generalizingwithin a given socialarea a new dominant mode of production,accumulation,circulation and distribution rela!ions,or ofany other superstructuralmanifestationofa nervt,vpeof economicmachine.Its mode of imaginarvexpressionis then that of the transitionalphantasv. Let us then look at the other end ofthe chain,the levelofdream production. We may identify anti-productionwith working out the manifestcontentof a dream,in contrastto the latent productionslinked with the impulsemachine 'a', described Lacan the root that constitutepart objects.The objetpetit by as of desire,the umbilicus of the dream, also breaksinto the structural equilibrium of the individual like someinfernalmachine.The subjectfinds it is being petit rejectedbv itself. In proportion with the changewrought by objet-maehine 'a'in the structural field ofrepresentation,successive formsofothernesstake their places for it, each fashioned to fit a particular stage of the process. Individual phantasizingcorrespondsto this mode ofstructural signposting by meansofa specificlanguagelinked with the ever-repeated urgingsofthe 'machinations' desire. of petit 'a', irreducible, unable to be The existence of this objet-machine absorbedinto the relerences ofthe structure,this 'selfforitself' that relatesto theelementsof the structureonly by meansof splittingand metonymy,means that the representationof oneselfby meansof the'stencils'of languageleads 'otherness'.The to a deadend, to a breakingpoint, and the needfor a renewed objectofdesire de-centresthe individual outside himself,on the boundariesof the other; it represents the impossibility of any complete refuge of the self insideoneself,but equally the impossibilityof a radicalpassageto the other. Indi','idualphantasvrepresents this impossiblemergingof di{Ierentlevels;it is thisthat makesit diflerentlrom group phantasizing,for a group has no such 'hitchingposts' of desire on its surfiace,no such remindersof the order ol specifictruths as the body's erogenouszones,and their capacitvlor touching andbeingtouchedby other people. Group phantasy superimposesthe dillerent levels,changesthem round, substitutes one for another.It can onlv turn round and round upon itself.This circularmovementleadsit to mark out certainareasasdeadends,as banned, asimpassable vacuoles,a whole no-man'sland of meaning.Caught up within
r r6
Towards a New Vocabulary
currency,but a the group, one phantasyreflectsanotheriike interchangeable currencyrvith no recognizablestandard.no ground ofconsistencvwherebyit can be related.even partiallv, to anything other than a topologyofthe most purely generalkind. The group-as astructure-phantasizeseventsby means of a perpetual and non-responsiblecoming and going between the general and the particular. A leader,a scapegoat,a schism,a threateningphantasy from another group - anv of theseis equatedwith the group subjectivity. Each e'rentor crisiscan be replacedby anothereventor crisis,inauguratinga further sequencethat bears,in turn, the imprint of equivalenceand identity. Today's truth can be related to yesterday's,for it is always possibleto re-write history. The experienceof psychoanal,vsis, the starting up of the psychoanalvtic machine.makesit clear that it is impossiblelor the desiringsubjectto preservi such a s-vstemof homologt,and re-writing: the only function of the translerencein this case is to reveal the repetition that is taking place, to operatelike a machine- that is in a u'av that is the preciseoppositeof a group eflect. The group's instinctualsystem,becauseit is unableto be linked up to the petit 'a' returning to the surfaceof the phantasy body desiring rnachine - objets - is doomed to multiply its phantasy identifications.Each of these is structuredin itself,but is still equivocalin its relationshipto the others,The fact that they lack the diflerentiating factor Gilles Deleuze talks of dooms thenr to a perpetuai process of merging into one another. Any change is precluded, and can be seen only between structural levels. Essentially, no break is any iongeraccepted.That the structureshaveno specificidentifying rnarksmeansthat the;' become'translatable'into one another,thus developing a kind of indefinite logical continuum that is peculiarly satisfvingto obsessionals.The identification of the similar and the discoveryof diflerence at group level function according to a second-degreephantasy logic. It is, for example, the phantasy representationof the otlter group that will act as the locatingmachine.In a sense,it is an excessof logicthat leadsit to an impasse. This relationshipolthe structuressetsgoing a mad machine,madder than the maddestoflunatics, the tangentialrepresentationofa sado-masochistic logic in which everythingis equivalentto everythingelse,in which truth is always somethingapart" Political responsibilityis king, and the order of the generalis radically cut offfrom the order of the ethical.The ultimate end of group phantasy is death - ultimate death, destruction in its own right, the radical abolition of any real identifving marks, a state of things in which not merely has the probiem oftruth disappeared forever but has never existed evenas a problem. This group structure representsthe subject for another structure as the basis of a subjectivitv that is clogged up, opaque, turned into the ego. Whereas,for the individual, it was the object of unconsciousdesire that
Machine and Structure I r7 functioned as a system of change or machine, in a group it is either the sub-wholesthat happen to come into being temporarilvwithin the group or anothergroup that will assumethat function.This areaolstructural equivalencewill thus have the lundamentalfunction of concealingor abolishingthe entry ofany particular object representedeitheron the screenofthe human subjectby unconsciousdesire,or on the more generalscreenofunconscious signifying chains bv the change eflectedby the closeds),sremof machines. The structuralorder olthe group, olconsciousness, ofcommunication,is thus surroundedon all sidesby rhesesystemsof machineswhjch it will never be able to control, either by grasping the objets petit'a'as rhe unconsciousdesire machine, or the phenomena of breaking apart related to other types of machines.The essenceof the machine,as a factor lor breakingapart, as the a-topicalfoundationolthat order ofthe general,is that one cannotultimately distinguishthe unconscioussubjectofdesire from rhe order ofthe machine itself. on one side or other of all structural determi*ations.the subiect of economics,of history and of scienceall encounter that sameobjetpetit ,a;as the lour.rdationof desire. An exampleofa structurefunctioningassubjectlor anotherstructureis the lact that the black community in the United Sratesrepresentsan identification imposed by rhe white order. To rhe modernistconsciousness this is a confused,absurd, meaninglessstateof things. Art unconsciousproblematic challengesthe rejectionof a more radical 'otherness'that would be combined with. say, a rejectionof economic'otherness'.The assassination of Kennedy was an event that 'represented'the impossibilityof registeringthe economic and socialothernessof the Third World, as wirnessedby the failure of the Alliancefor Progress,the endeavourto destroyVietnam and so on. One can only note here the points of intersectionand continuity betrveenthe economy ofdesireand that ofpolitics. At a particular poinr in histor,vdesirebecomesfocalizedin the totality of structures;I suggestthat for this u'e usc the generalterm ,machine':it could bea new weapon,a new production technique,a ne1!'setofreligiousdogmas, or such major new discoveriesas the Indies,relativity,or the moon. To cope with this, a structural anri-production developsuntil it reachesits own saturation point, while the revolutionary breakthrough also develops,in counterpointto this, another discontirruousarea of anti-production that tendsto re-absorbthe inrolerablesubjectivebreach,all ofwhich meansthat ir persistsin eludir.rgthe antecedentorder. We may say of revolution,of the revolutionaryperiod, that this is rvhenthe machinerepresenrssocialsubjectivity lor the s!ructure - as opposedto the phaseofoppressionand stagnarion, when the superstructuresare imposed as impossible representationsof machineefrects.The common denominatorof w,ritingsof this kind in history wouldbe the openingup ola pure signifvingspacewhere the machinewould
I i8
Towards a New Vocabulary
l'epresentthe subject lor another machine. But one can no longer then continueto say ofhistory, as the site ofthe unconscious,that it is'structured like a ianguage'exceptin that there is no possiblewritten lorm ofsuch a language. It is, in fact, impossibletc systematizethe real discourseof history, the circurnstance that causesa particular phase or a particular signifier to be representedby a particular event or social group, by the emergenceofan individual or a discovery,or whatever. in this sense'we must consider,d priori, that the primitive stagesolhistory are u'here trurh is primarily to be sought; historv does not advancein a continuousmovement:its structural phenomenadevelop accordingto their own peculiar sequences, expressing and indicating signifying rensionsrhar remain unconsciousup to the point where they breakthrough.That point marksa recognizable breakin rhe rhree dimensions of exclusion, perseveranceand threat. Historical archaisn-rs expressa reinlorcing rather than a weakening ofthe structural eflect. That And16Malraux could say that the twenriethcenturyis the centuryof nationalism,in contrast to the nineteenth,which was that of internationalism, was becauseinternationalism.lacking a structural expressionthat matched the economicand social machineriesat work within it, withdrew into nationalism,and then further, into regionalismand the varioussortsof particularism that are developingroday, even within the supposedlyinternational communistmovement. The problem olrevolutionary organizationis the problem ofsetting up an institutional machine whose distinctive leatures would be a theory and practice that ensuredits not having to depend on the various socialstructures - above all the State strucrure, which appears to be the keystone of the dominant production relations, even though it no longer correspondsto the meansolproduction. What entrapsand deceivesus is thar it looks today as though nothing can be articulated outside rhat structure. The revolutionary socialist intention to seizecontrol of political power in the State,which it sees as the instrumental basisof classdomination, and the institutional guarantee cf pri..rateownership of the meansof production, has been caught injust that trap. It has itself becomea trap in its turn, for that intention, though meaning so much in terms ofsocial consciousness, no longer correspondsto the reality of economic or social forces.The institutionalization of 'world markets' and the prospect ofcreating super-Statesincreasesthe allure ofthe rap; so does the modern reformist programme of achieving an ever-greater 'popular' control ofthe economic and social sub-wholes.The subjectiveconsistencyof society,as it operatesat every level ofthe economy,society,culture and so on, is invisible today, and the institutions that express it are equivocal in the extreme. This was evident during the revolution of lvlay I 968 in France,when the nearest approximation to a proper organization of the struggle rvas the
Machine and Structure r r 9 hesitant, late and violently opposed experiment of lorming actior) commlttees. The revolutionarv programme, as the machine for institutional subversion, should demonstrateproper subjectivepotential and, at every stageof the struggle, should make sure that it is lortified against any attempt to 'structuralize' that potential. But no such permanentgraspofmachine effectsupon the structurescould really'be achievedon the basisofonly one itheoreticalpractice'.It presupposes the development of a specific analytical praxis at every level of organizationof the sruggle. Such a prospectwould in turn make it possibleto locatethe responsibility of those who are in any waf in a position genuinely to utter theoretical discourseat the point at which it imprints the classstruggleat the very centre ofunconsciousdesire.
The Planeof Consistency r2l
The Plane of Consistencyr
The term is an approximation. As will becomeclear from what I am going to say. first, it canrrotbe just a single plane, and second,we have to make a distinctionbetweenmathematicalconsistencyand the machinic consistency \{e are concernedrvith here. For the moment, let us note that: - Mathematical consistencyimplies a set of axioms that are noncontradictorv.2 * Machinic consistencyavoids such an implication in that it does not resort tc a dualist systemof appulngmultiplicities to a semioticwhole so much as embracingthe totality" It doesnot thereforehave anything to'fear' lrom purely logicalconradictions. - Moreover, the basis of axiomatic consistencyis the lact that ultimately there is a consistencyin machinic propositions. * The plane of consistencvindicates that the machinic phylum is a canlinuun.The unity ofany process,the unity ofhistory, residesnot in the fact of a shared time encompassingand traversingeverything,but in the fact of that coltinuum of the machinic phylum, which itself results from the conjunction of the totality of de-territorialization processes. Whenever a muitiplicity unfolds,the plane of consistencyis brought into operation.The machinic phylum is in time and space.Plane,here, has the senseof the phylum, the continuous.Nothing is small enoughto escapethe net of machinic propositions and intensities.The strata of slbjectiaityare set againstthe pianeofthe agencyofcollectiveutterance,the subjectagainstthe agent. The plane of machinic consistencyprovides the answer to Russell's paradox. There really is a totality of all the totalities.But it is not a logical totalitv; it is a machinic one. The problem of the continuousis resolvedat the level of the machinic phylum befiorebeing stated in mathematical terms.
r . lrtrotesmadc in April r 97:, a, Robert Blanchd shows that a closer analysis distinguishes betwcen contradiction and consistency,bctween dillerent notions ofconsistency,and so on (L'Axiomatique,PressesUniversitaires de France, l 955, p. 48). This is something that needsexploring.
Matlrematics and Physics, Technological Innovation and the Military Machine - At first theseappear to be quite disparatefieldswhich will only coincide 1npresent-daydevelopmentof the economicand national military complex. - But in fact, ,.r'ehave to start lrom the premise that, from the veryfrst, they mergeinto one another,and that what makesthe web of history - that is of historvup until the scientificrevolutions- is the machinic phylum. The machinic phylum takeso{f with the military machine,then with the technologicalinno'"'ationslinked with the concentrationof the means of productionin primitive statemachines(cities,empires,etc.),and finally with the scientificrevolutions.But the machinic power of desirewas, alwaysand everl,where,already there. To take an example,the invention of bronze in southernSiberia led to the territorializationoftribes whoseficrmofproduction was settledand agrarian.The collectivedesireenergyrapidly changedits objectand turned thosesocietiesinto a military proto-machine.Nomadism introducedlurther benefits,both in material termsand in termsofdesire.(In some cases,the extensivestock-breedingof the nomad machine caused settledagriculture to disappearaltogether.)3In'a few decades',there had comeinto being an encodedsurplus-valuewhich led to the abandonmentof settledhomesteads. Wealth 'suddenlystoppedbeingthe desireto own a piece ofsround'. Peoplehad acquired'a new conceptionoforvnership,with land as somethingmerely to be used.basedon mouable goods, flocks,horses,chariots, personaleilects, bows and arrows, rvhat was gained by pillage' and 'an expanded,,vealth'. In all this, machinic power was making and unmaking primitive territorialitv and nomadism,the primitive stateand its divisions.We thereforefind the plane ofconsistencyboth as the impossiblegoal ofthe history ofscience and tire preliminar,vto the 'start' of histor.v. It is important to consider the position of the plane ol consistencyin relationto the semioticmachine,to the independence acquiredby the voiceas theinstrument lor opening up the field of the spokenword. Why should the battle-cry,the mating call, leave the sphere of the functional, of caste behaviour,to becomeopen to a transvaluationof encoding?Words have a di{Ierentuse:they carrv lurther - or perhapsthey go nowhere.Thev produce new connections.After all, it is surely in this figurative shift of the oral semioticmachinesthat the essence of the phenomenonof religionlies? In any case,it is in the frameworkof the city machines,with the primitive stateas anti-productionof the military proto-machine,that we can identify oneof the two basic strata of the territorializationof the plane of machinic consistencl'-the other one in fact being brought into action bv the military 3.
'Prdsence des Scvthes', Crilique,December t97 t.
t_
r2,2 Towards a New Vocabulary prc)to-m?1chine. The questionof whether the militarl' proto-machinecomes beloreor after the primitive stateis secondary.There is, in eflect,a link, an encodedsurplus-r,alue betweenfhe two. Either the primiti'e statefinds itself having to fall back on the military proto-machinein the name of antiproduction, or, conversely,it has itselfachieveda technologicaltake-oll,a systemof innovation (in the sphereof written language,the use of metals, ditTerentiatingthe kind of work to be done bv people lrom that done bv anirnalsetc.), and is in turn enrichingthe military machineand moving it a notch higher in rhe processofde-territorialization. The fiuxesare tidied away, controlledand over-encodedbv meansolthe writing rnachine.In this case,despotismis svnonymousn,ith forcine e'erything into a bi-univocalmould, fitting the whole of the gcodson the sherves into a new whole of graphic symbols, The military proto-machineconsumedits goods- lor instance,when a pharaohdied, his concubines,his servantsand evenhis slavesrverekilled. In the feudal system,on the orher hand, which set out to preservethe labour force of its serls and the fighting force of irs vassals,the primitive state restrictedand dela,vedsuch consumption.The sign was retained.Semiotic Cedipaiism, for the writing machine, consistsin an exrernal taking hold of objects and subjectsin their completeness.writing and reckoning are not the same as consuming, though to name a thing may be a way of eating it. 'fhe positionof writing is thus one of anti-production.A written text, itself impotent,is ne'erthelessa sign olpower. This is the sourceof the dichotomy between mathematics anci phvsics. Pythagoras was concerned with the 'essential' numbers that lay beyond ,real, powers. In an article in the EnclclopaediaUniuersalis,'Phvsique et marhimatiques,, Jean N{arc Levytr eblond presentsa critique of the two forms in which peoplehave soughtio make mathematics'thelanguage'ofphysics.Mathematicsis viewedeitheras the languageof nature, rvhich man must learn (the attirude of Galireoand Einstein),or as the languageof man in which natural phenomenahave to be expressed(the attitude ofHeisenberg). But there are also all the possible positions betweenthese two, all of which, in one way or another, tend to consolidatethe dualism between empiricism and formalism - opposing nature tc) man, experienceto theorizing, concrete to abstact, scientific phenomenato scientificlaws and so on. Ler^,r-Leb.lond maintains that there are two possibleusesfor mathematics in tl're sciences.It may have a relationship of apptication - as with chemistrv, biology, the sciencesof the Earth and all other spheresin which ihcre is numerical calculationand a manipulation of quantities.or it mav 'Thus have a relationshipof conrrf tutionorproducrian, mathematicsis interiorizec by physics', and their conceprsare indissolublvinterlinked (derived
The PlaneolConsistency r2Z speedand the electro-magneticfield, for instance).This sort of relationship is peculiar to physics (which Bachelard failed to realize when he spoke of a 'progressivemathematicization'of all the sciences).Nevertheless,the separation between mathematics and physics remains. They are different in kind. Unlike mathematics,physicsis difficult to expressin axioms.One can give severalcoherent mathematicalexpressionsof the same law or concept in physics(mathematicalpolymorphism). In physicsthe principlesand lau's aremore mobile, more transcursive, less hierarchized. Conversely, a single mathematicalstructure can govern a number of diilerent domains without 'a 'underlying unity'- what Poincar6called hiddenharmony therebeingany is identit,vof the object of (mathematical plurivalence). It the in things' physicsthat can only be known approximately, that eludes absolute definition. Thus there is a contradictory two-way movement going on: mathematicsis tendingto evergreaterautonom,v,but alsotendingto greaterinterwith mathematicalphysics. dependence 1n lgl,y-Leblond's view one must abandon the idea of any hierarchy 'it amongthe sciencesin lavour of mathematicizing them: is by the nature of its relationshipto mathematics,and by the constitutiverole mathematics - major or minor - can be seen piays,that any branch of the natural sciences asbelongingto the sphereofphysics'. In other words, physicsis constituted by two processesof de-territorialization (a semiotic processand a material process).An object in physics becomesconsistentonly in so far as it can authenticalll'be treated mathematically.It no longer has a relationshipof application with the sign, but one of production. The way the particle correspondswith the sign no longer refers to the disjunctive synthesesofa systemof representation, but to an experimental connective system and a theoreticalconjunctive system, in which the surplus-valuesof encodingor of setsof axioms are formed lVe thus end up with a physics-mathematics complex that links the of a systemof signs with the de-territorializationof a de-territorialization clusterof phenomenain physics.Levy-Leblondwould seem,at this second, 'material' level, to be niaintaining the primacy of the existenceof the real. The traditionalsplit benveenmathematicsand the natural sciences(including physics)sanctioned by experimentationawould appear to be, for him, insuperable. We may note the twolold connection between the de-territorialized phe- that is, to the most 4. The wav in which he rgjects any subjection of physia to mathematia srratum - by quoting the example ofastro-physics,which becameestablishedon de.rerritorialized theprevicusi.vmathematicized ground ofastronomy, is unconvincing N'lathematicalastronomy wil never a'non-experimental'sciene: it was physics already on the way to being turned into mathematics,
tz+ Towards a New VocabularY t6an nornenorlof the ph'sicist and the mathematicssign machine.5Rather the on inertia oJ a nnmtnl with e dealing we ar sa)r Iet us ollject, an tutf i"g about of de-terriat a given point in the contingen! Process part oi themachinism science' to.iaiirutior"t.In the last resort,mathematicsis also an experimental rest as at past still in the were rvhich nomena phe rliotic with se nts I t experirne future more grup'hi. symbolsirre srill ar rest, but might perhapsbe so in the ot.. tn. iashionofrhe figuresofspeechand syntacticalrulesolinformation-
The Plane of Consistency r25
the partial machinisms harmonize on a single plane of consistency- not susceptibleto being totalizedinto one axiomatic, not susceptibleto representation,bu.tinfinitelyde-totalized,de-territorialized, de-axiomatized.And this plane of consistencythat mathematicslinks up *,ith the other ::,L:j:."" Machinic consistencvevadesthe alternativeof mathematicalconsistency defined by Gridel's theorem. First of all, to it a machinic connecrionmay be t h e o r y m a c h i n e s . . f l r e o b j e c t o | p h , v s i c s i s p a r t i c l e s ( t h e r e a r e s o m e h y p o t h e . actual and non-actual: machinic time encodescontradiction, the observerof light, the contradiction has his own machinic time, the connecrionis governed by tical ones,known as tachyons,that are supposedto travel fasterthan the general relativity of conjunctions.Secondly,nothing escapesit. Machines not being subjectto the usuallimitationsof causalitv going back in time, ar-icl cannot stand emptiness, lack, negation, an exclusively referential stratum. E'er1.such moment of inertia is connectedrvith a particttand i.-,ilbrmatio'r).6 of With machinesthe questionis one of connectionor non-connection, without l a r s i t u a t i o no i t h e r n a c h i n i s m . J L i sa rs t h e m a c h i n i s r lo. )f e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n ofmathetlre expansion lor conditions conditions,without any need to render an account to any third party. It is the produced has physics theoretical m a t i 0 a l p h y s i c s , s o t l r e i n f i c r m a t i o n - t h e o r y m a c h i n i s m w i l l p r o b a b l v c o m e t o from that that the surplus-valueofencodingoriginates.The situationis like 'pure' mathematics'We that of the bumble-bee which, by being there, became part of the genetic more eflecton the developmentof huve ,-,-to..'ar-rd being phvsics and mathematics both chain of of the orchid. The specific event passesdirectly into the chain of in terms think to may thereforecome lrom thinkFar machine. encoding until another machinic event links up with a different temporalizatheoretic-experimental the al()ngside sense in sonte on the tion, a dillerent conjunction. ins that \4'ecan radically axiomatizephysics,we shall find ourselves .oirr.u.y having ro r.elativizethe axior'atizationof mathematics. It is the principle of the excludea ,flira term rhat is itself excluded here. jossible a*iomatizationsas you like for Ultimately, the only referenceis the plane of consistency,but no limit or lack The computer.willproduce as manv Mathematicsis not concerned must be written into it. The plane of consistencyis the organlessbody of all e'er' th;ry - o poiitir. {loodof axiomatics.T as much a machineas physicsis, It is axiomatic svstems;it is not the total being of the machinism, but the harmony. rvitir'pureuniversalsemictic it is somewhat impossibilityof concludingor totalizingmachinicexpansion. exceprthat, front the poiilt of view of technicalmachinisni, claim that Behind the opposition betweenwhat is as yer hardly axiomatizedat ali lirrrher behind. Godel'stheoremnarked the condemtrationof any less (thatis, physics)and what is very much so (that is, mathematics)one can see axiomaticsis omnipotent.BUndoubtedlV,therelore,therecan be lessand theoutline of the order of what is'radically non-axiomatizable'- machinic possibilityof concludingthe variousattemPtsat mathematicaxiomatization multiplicity. Axiomatics was related to the structure of representation, on the contrary,what I want to shorvis that all with any super-axiomatics. whereasthe flux ofaxiomatization relaresto machinic production. This being r h e s p l i t l l e t l e e n p h y s i c sa n d t h e o l h c r s c i e n c e sl h a t u s e so,can one maintain that physics has a specialrelationship with the order of 5 . I a l s e ' h a v e r c s e r v a t i o t r sa b o u t other n u n , e r i c a lo r d e r . I r i s p o s s i b l et h a t t h e r e a r e o t h e r m a t h e m a t i c s ,o t h e r e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n s ' existingrealit)'? machinisms. The object of the mathematics/physicscomplexusis not physical; it relates rvith working compuler a what would in scierce-fiction: 6. Here we conle to a lirtle probiem neitherto the nature of the physical nor to the physical as nature. Machinism r a c l r ro n s o c l i k r l C f . I ? r c h c , . h tn: .o 7 . D e c c m b e rr 9 7 o . p 6 ; 5 ' R u y e r ' sp o s i t i o ni n c o n d e m n i n ga p r i o r it h e p o s s i b i l i t v links together physics and mathematics, working equally well with symbols 7 . I n m y v i e r v t h c r e i s n o j u s t i f i c a r i o nf o r t h a t c i ' b e r n e t i c sm a y e x p a n d i n f i n i t e l y . andparticles.The particleis definedby a chainofsymbols;physicisrs'invent, .. o n a f i n i t en u m b e r B . . . G o d e l ' sr h e o r e mn : r k e s c l e a r t h a t w h a t e v e rt h e o r vt h e r em a y b e b a s e d particlesthat have not existed in 'nature'. Nature as existing prior to the unprovable some of axion)s r,; make it possible to construct arithmetic, one can alr*ays discover '(\Varusfel, that machineno longer exists. The machine produces a di{Ierent nature, and in Dicttonntire dts '\'lathimatiques' P 2!t7] If one appends proposirion in it . . . theory' but otre in a rve have different then axiom, order supplementary to do so it definesand manipulates it r.r,ithsymbols (the diagrammatic as a proposirion paradoxical number o1-axioms w h i c h r h e r e i s a { u r r h e r u n p r o v a b l ep r o p o s i t i o n .I t i s i m p o s s i b l e ' t h a ta f i n i t e process). l a t h e m a t i c si n w h i c h n o t m e r e l l ' w o u l dt h e p r i n c i p l eo f s h o u i d b e e n o u g ht o e s t a b l i s ha n y u n i v e r s a m Epistemologicalprimacy thereforelies neither with mathematics nor with in which any the excluded third (P cannot at rhe same time be true and false) bc true' but physics. It may perhapslie with art. It is arguablethat the mostde-terrirorialnon'de monstrable proposirion might be eillur rse or faise. Some theorems will a)wa.vsre main ized level relates to the sign. It is true that the mathematical sign has ( i b i d . 1 . I h c m ' t o b e c a u s cr h e r ei s n . r a n s w e r
I26
Towards a Nerv Vocabulary
sometimes let its hand be lorced bv the de-territorializationof experimental pirvsics.but, equallv.it is the de-teritorializationof the sign that governsthe entire process,generalizingits eflects,and projecting the surplus value of encoding onto the totalitv of encodedareas. Even in caseswhere phvsics appearsto be controlling !he movement,the machinic points remain on the side of the mathematicsmachine. And this wili be even more the case as physicsbecornesmore involvedin information-theorvtechnologvand abandons anv claim to signiii anvthing at all apart fi'om irs own machinic connectrons. Yet thoseparticlesreallv do exist- somewhereelse,in other galaxiesfor example.Thev are not inventedor arrangedby mathematicsand physicsas though createdbi'an artist. Hou'ever,the galaxiesarealsocollectiveproduction agents,'settingup' particles,arrangementsof matter,of life and so on. It is not a questionhereofcontrastingnature rvith creation,but oflikening it to creati\/emachines.The galaxiesare alsocollectiveagentsilnor ofutterance, at leastofproduction. lVhat is perhapspeculiarto what happenson or:r pianetis that production is airvavsaccompaniedby a transcription:the collectivetransductiveagency of'nature is paralleled and surpasseclby' a collectiveagencyo1'utterance, r,vithinu hich the de-territorializationolthe sign playsa major part. The sign paralleis the particle. It goes further than it in its capacities of deterritorialization,and providesit with an added capacitylor multiplicitv. 'Ihe de-territorializationthat runs throueh the wholemarhematics/physics compiexus iur.'olvesscientists,but also a lot else besides:all of political society,the flux of investments.armies arrd so on. De-territorializationis produced as much by the sign as by nature. However, the most important instrument.the machinic spearhead, now sideswith the sign.The sign-point of this complexuscan be consideredlrom two angles:as asigntt is an agentof de-territorialization;as a phvsicalpoint,it is the point of recurrenceof the lesidualph],sicai{lux in the role of anti-production. We are now concernednot with the representative functionof the sign,or of its application, but w,ith the productive and anti-productiveaspectsof the 'fhe sign-point. distinction benveenmathematical representationand the ploduction of physics relates to rvhat we may call a scientific Oedipus situation. lVitlr the advent of rvriting, the sound machine has become seconclarv.With the coming of information machinisms,and their audiovisual developments,the traditionalwriting machinema)'now alsobe on the u'ay to becoming secondary. To return to individuated utterance: it is something thar cannot be detached from its circumstancesof time and place, of sex, of class, etc. Florvever,the moment of inertia i,,henthe splitting-offinto subjectivity' occurs cannot ire arssigned purel.vand simplv to tl"reorder of representation. Just
The Plane of Consistency r27 whatis it that enablesa sign machineto'grasp'and controla flux of particles? It is man's specific capacity for de-territorialization that enables him to producesignsfor no purpose:not negativesigns,not nothing signs,but signs to play about with for fun, for art. Human intervention so transforms things that an oral semiotic machine produces numenfor no reason, and a writing machinein the hands of mischievousscribesruns to no purpose (for example, thepoetry ofancient Egypt). Art and religion are arrangementsfor producing signswhich will eventually produce power signs,sign-pointscapable ofplaying the parr ofparticles in thearena of de-territorialization. The Shamanic invocation, the sign-writing of the geomancer,are in themselvesdirect symbols of power. They mark the importation into nature of signs of power, of a schiz that, via successive surplusvaluesof encoding,w'ill eventually bring rue the wildest dreams:first thedream of the alchemist; nrst desire, beforede-territorializing mathematicalsignsand the particlesofphysics.It is the dualist reductionofcapitalist Oedipalist science that tends to sterilize science even as it is expanding (splitting up into separate compartments research,production, technology, teaching,art, economics,etc.). It is the conjunctionof the military machine andthe State with sciencethat determines the importance to be attributed to scienceand definesthe scopeofits activity. We must therelore distinguish between the individuated Oedipalist utterance, directed towards bi-univocity, the complete object, representative application, and the quite diflerent individuated schizo utterance whose force,whose de-territorializing charges,go out to the furthest cornersofthe universe. The phenomenonof physicsdoesnot need to be 'mentalized',but encoded,made machinic. To read, to understand, to interpret - this is to renderpowerless.The sign must abandon its yearning for oral semioticsand betransformed into a machinic sign-point so as to throw itself unreservedly intothe machinicphylum. The schizo position, which articulates the de-territorializedchains of collectiveagencies of utterance that constitute the present-day scientific machine, cannot be reducedto the sum ofthe interventionsby individuals.It is somethingtrans-individual.The schizo scientistindividually produces de-territorializedsignsalongsidea coliectivemachine. The cutting edge,so to say,ofthe machincis herethe desire,or perhapsthe madness,ofthe scientist. His desire has become a sign of power by coming into contact with the machinism.The collective agency of utterance that connects things with peopledoes not crush 'human values'. What gives the scientific machine its super-poweris the super-humannessthat carriesdesire to the heart ofbeing. Far more powerful than any physicist's cyclotron is the desire that produces 'natural' partide-territorialized signs- super-particles capableofexploding clesinto a multiplicity, and so in a senseforcing them to be on the defensive.
r28
Towards a New Vocabulary
The de-materializationof nature, its transmutations,its new productions, all dependon the de-territorializingpower ofdesire.The intensityofdesireis strongerthan the de-territorializingintensitiesanywhereelsein nature, Not d c q i r ei n i t s e l I t h e d e s i r en f d r e a m s h r r t t h e d e s i r ei n s c r i b e di n m a c h i n i c complexes. The questionthen is whether awarenessofself, ofindividuated utterance, If what is is a function of anti-production.To this there are two ans\4'ers. meant is the Oedipalistcogito,rhereductionto the levelof the individual, the machine is ego, the lamilv, then the answeris Yes. But if the consciousness secnas somethingthat emptiesout the sign,the spacein one'sheart,to charge it with i'rrvholly new power so that it can becomeattached to *'hatever it wants at once.lasterthan light, then the ans\{'eris No. The tachvoncould be an elementarl,particie of de-territorializationbelongingat once to physics ar-rdto the arrangementsolsemiotics. Indeed, perhapsthe very thought ol de-territorializationconstitutesa kind of anti-matter! doesnot make The annihilation olintentionality b.vthe phenomenologists useolsome substancesupposedto be a vastNothing, but the omnipotenceof a complex of de-territorializationis potentiallycapableof creatinga multiand awarenessof oneself, plicit-vout of whatever it touches.Consciousness and of the nearnessof a collectiveutterancemachine, producesthe most 'charge'of de-territorialization - a kind of anti-energl',ol enormousmachinic semioticanti-rnatter. The piane of consistencyis thus rvhat enablesall the various strata of socius,ol technologyand so on to be cut across,invested,disinvestedand transferred.Does this bring us back to the idea that there is an absolute knowledge,a superiorrationality, that is the goal of history?No, lor there is ofreference.The thesisofthe plane of no questionofits beinga super-system consistencyas the unattainablegoal ofhistorv amounts to a rejectionol'any order,or code attempt at totalization,any reductionto a singlerepresentative or set of axioms. It is a positiveafhrmation that it is possibleto escapelrom consistencl . hierarchiesof reference,and an underminingol representative Consistencydenies that there is one beingthat would encodethe essenceof history for its ou'n sake. It affirms the coherence,the consistencyof aprocess not expressiblein hard and last propositionsor rational theologies.Intensive multiplicities do not refer either to reason or chaos,or to eschatological significations.The machinicphvlum runs through all beingthat is held in the time/spacestrata of individuated utterance. Being in itself, being as unity, ofthe same,resultslrom the contingencyofan utterance being as the essence made impotent. Diagrammatic conjunctionsare the motive force for de-territorialization. They are the sourceof the machinic phylum, Only becauserepresentation has beenflattenedout into exclusivedysjunctivesyntheses do we find modes
The Plane of Consistency I29 are of subjectivationisolatedfrom any production.Time and consciousness not bound up with an individuated cogito.The links in the processof de-territorialization are the events, the meaning, the emergenceof machinic mutations.There are as many diflerent times coexistingas there are machines in action. The conscious human being is simply the manifestation of the ofde-territorialization, greatestintensity in the conjunctionofthe processes thehigh point ofde-territorialization,the point at which the signscoursitself out,loids in upon itselfto open out into a script that is levelwith reality. The finality olhistory is not to be lound in a blind machinism,but in the frnality of desire, in fact of the most self-aware desire of all, that of the supermanrvho has won mastery of beingin-itself by sacrificingmasteryof his Solitude,meditation,letting the contemplationof individualconsciousness. desirehave lree rein, the lossof individuation in lavour of cosmicengagement - ail this leads to a paradoxical combination of e{Iects: an individual hyper-subjectivationof desire (as in Samuel Beckett, for example) and a radicalabandonmentof the individual subjectto collectivities,that link man with the machinicphylum. Capitalism tries to interiorizethe unboundedboundariesofthe plane of consistency.It arranges ofgans, self-containedobjects, relationships, individual subjectivity. What prevented the organlessbody of the primitive State lrom abolishing the plane of consistency into infinite lragments was the setting in motion of the machinic phylum. Whereas the military protomachine destroyed whole towns, destroying even its own soldiers, the machinicphylum survives.
IntensiveRedundanciesand ExpressiveRedundancies r3r
trntensiveRedundanciesand Expressive R.edundancies'
and expressiveredundancies.Inten\\,'emust distingLiishbetlveenir-rtensir,'e sii.'eredundanciesadvancebv wav of intrinsic encoding,u'ithout involving specificstrata of expression;thus they themselvesremain the prisonersof encodingstratification.They include,for example,the intrinsicstratification of the 6eld of nuclear particles,or that of atomic, molecular,chemical or biological organization. None of these lorms of encoding, reproduction, maintenanceand interaction can be detachedfrom its individual stratum, There is nn relationshipof expression,concordance,interpretation,reference)etc.,among the differentstrata;they remain unaffectedby one another. One can onlv passlrom an energystratum to, say) a material or biological stratum) by meansof a surplus-valueof encoding,a kind of proliferationand irrterlacingof codes.but one w,ith respectlor the autonomv and integrity of the various strata.The heaped-upstrata lorm a kind of humus, or what one might call a systemof soups.Behind life thereis a biologicalsoup,beyondthe soup and so on. We thus have a semiotic biologicalsoup a phirsico-chemical machine which is encoded .rlithout changing levels. Abstract machines remain the prisonersoltheir stratifications. Only when specific,autonomizedsemioticmachinesare brought into plav can there be a direct passagelrom one stratum to another.There will then be The semioticmachine not a surplus-r'alueolencoding,but a trans-encoding. procedureofabsolutede-territorializationthat is capableofcrossing setso1'l-a all the stratifications.Such a semioticmachine embarkson its autonomization with the biologicalreproductionmachine.In fact, this latter is the first speciaiizationof a reading machine that crushesthe intensities,squeezing them as one squeezesthejuice out offruit. The machineofgeneticexpression implies the detachmentof one strand of encodingto act as a reproduction rnould. Thus there is establisheda s,vstemof twolold articulation: a deterritorializedstrand ofencoding, in other words a strand as lar as possible a line that is attachedto the detachedfrom the secondand third dimensions,z r . N o t e sm a d e i n A p r i l r 9 7 . 1 . 'l'he :. r e l a t j v ep o s i t i o n so { ' r h e t i m c d i m e n s i o nm i q h t p e r h a p sm a k c i t p o s s i b l et o p i n p o i n t t h e d i f l c r e n t : eb e t w e c n g e n e t i c c o d e s a n d l i n g u i s t i c c o d e s ; t h e t i m e w h e n r e l a t i o n s h i p so f b i u n i v o c a l i z a t j o nc o n r ei n t o b e i n g i s n a r r o r v e ra n d s t r i c t e ri n t h e g c n e t i cm a c h i n e .w h e r c a st h e f o r m s or unrlcrlvn i g st r u c t u r e si n l a n g u a g ei n t r o du c ea c e r t a in i a g b e t w e e nt h e o r g a ni z a t i o no f u t t c r a n c e s and that ofcodcs.
intensitiesand diagrammatizesthem. Only the lact that such a line can be discerned makes it possible to read and transcribe a complex process diachronically. The processofreproduction, in crystallography for exampie, does not have recourse to this alignment system of the code. A threedimensionalcrystal,or a solutionin the processof becomingcrystallized,only 'de-codes' the organization of another crysral lrom outside; it can only model or adapt itself to it, Unlike the RNA and DNA chains,a crystalremainstoo territorializedto be able to reach the level of the abstract machinesthat govern the processofphvsico-chemicalde-territorialization.But the genetic chain isjust as much the prisonerof the organismstratum. The same is the case, though to a lesser extent, with the deterritorializationofuttering forces- in primitive societiesfor instance.They make a start on setting trans-coding systems into operation, but such trans-codingis still only relativeand poly-centred.This poly-cenrredness is theexpressionofa kind ofrejectionolrhe'gangrene'ofde-territorialization, a rejectionthat can be indicated by the way a machinic systemis organizedinto castes.(For example,traditional societieswili try to restrictthe expansionof metallurgy perhaps,or ofwriting, by allowing them only to be usedfor certain specificpurposes.)Only at the end ofthe processofdegenerationofsignifying semiologies,with the emergenceof a machinic utterancecomplex,will the lines of diagrammatizationand socio-materialcollectiveagenciesstart to operatewhich will produce the sign machinesthat can really control the stratifications.The de-territorializationof signs- in mathematicaiphysics, information-theory,etc. - gives the sign a kind of super-linearquality; so much so that one can no longer speakstrictly in terms of a sign at all any more. We have left the sphere of a pre-signifying poly-vocal expressioninvolving movements, words, dancing; we have even left that of semiologiesoverencodedby the signifier, and the post-signifying sphere of the axiomatized letters and signs of science and art; we are now dealing with a direct expressionof abstract machinisms. The dillerence between sign and particle is blurred; diagrammatization deniesthe primacy ofmaterial fluxes,while on the other hand the real intensities speak for themselves, borrowing the method of machines including only a minimum of semiologicalinertia. Theories,theoristsand economic/experimentalcomplexesform a network of non-signifying expressive substances which can demonstrate their deterritorializationsin spaceand time, without the mediation ofany representatlon. At this level one can no longer speakofseparatescientific areassuch as the areaof astro-physicsor the area of micro-physics.We are faced with a single universeofabstract machines,working both on the galactic and on the atomic scale.(Cf. the theoriesabout the first secondofthe expansionofthe universe.) Thus it is the very idea of scale that succumbs to the principle of relativity,
r32
Torvards a New Vocabulary
and il' there are extra-rerrestrialu,orlds similar to the human, it is as reasonableto expect to find them in the world of micro-physicsas in other galaxies.Not that this makesit any easierto make contactwith theml The existenceof semiotic machines,therefore,correspondsto an intermediatephasein the de-territorializationprocess.'Before'the sign (this side of it) the abstractmachinesremain the prisonersof stratification.'After' the sign (rvith a-signiffing machinic complexes)we leavethe senrioticregisterto pass to the direct inscription of the abstract machines on the plane of consistency.'Before'the sigrithereis a redundanc,v of pure stratified informat i o n . ' A f t e r ' t L r e s i g n , t h e r e i s a d e - s t r a t i f r e idn f o r m a t i o n ,a d e - s t r a t i f y i n g diagran'rmarization- in other words a princ.ipleof transformation that repeatsthe relativede-territorializations, and opensup the intensivestratificationson the basis of the de-territorializingpower of the sign machines. Betrveenthe t\4'oale the semiologiesof significativeredundanc,v,in other r,vordsall the systemsthat work to renderimpotent the intensiveprocesses of de-territr.rrialization. The stratified encodings- physico-chemical, biological, ecological,etc.- having coliapsedone after another,de-territorializationhas Iostsomeof its weight,The strataare no longerhermeticallyseparated:fluxes o{ irltensivede-territorializalionpasslrom one to another.Systemsoldouble articulation of form-content redundanciesrepresentan attempt at total shutting-off But their oniy result is a relative de-territorialization,a stlatifrcationof lorm that will end by missingits main aim, u.hich rvas to keep a tight rein on the potentialcreativityof non-signifyingmachines(miiirary and technologicalmachines,machinesof writing, of monetarv signs,scientific signsanclso on). After the barriersof'natural'de-territoriaiization,the next things to go will be thoseof 'artificial'semiologicalde-territorialization. This rvill mean the failure of all attempts to give things a representarivenature, basedon the u'olids, and worlds beyondthe worlds, olthe mind as so many fortificationsagainstthe acceleratingprocessof de-territorialization. inlbrmation theory has tried to save the bacon of the semiologiesof signilication by defining significative redundancies as being in inverse proportion to the quantity of information- but this is no more than a rearguard semiological skirmish. In fact, the transler of information belongs to a diagrammatic process that has no direct relation with the significative redundanciesof human 'understanding'.'Before' the signifier,redundancy irnd inlormation came togetherin a processof intrinsic diagrammatization. 'After' it, diagrammatizationstartsoffa processof unlimited trans-encoding. Between the two, however, signif-vingsemiological stratification still has a vital part to plav: for in lact the residuesof a signifying processaccumulatein thc same u'ays as thoseof an,vother strata of encoding.Lines of interpretation, r,viththeir hierarchy of contentsand lines of significance,with their carefullv monitored expansion, become a kind of raw material for the
IntensiveRedundanciesand ExpressiveRedundancies r33 settrng-upof non-signifyingsign machines.The by-productsof the signifier, figuresof expression,pre-diagrammaticagencies,are essentialelernentsol the engineeringof acceleratorsof particle-signswhose de-territorializing powerrvill be capableofbreaking down the strataofencoding. The organizationolthe living world first setup this sort of accelerator. At a certain ievel, multi-cellular organisms are still coloniesor collectionsof uni-cellularorganisms,living partly by a systemofintra-encoding,and partly by trans-encoding. But trans-encoding, though limited by having ro maintain thoseintrinsic encodings,is open to variouscosmicintensivestratifications, which it expresses and rearranges.In this sense,it may be said to represent the starting-up ol a primitive a-signifyingsemiotic machine. But we shall obviouslvhave to make a radical distinctionbetw'eenthis biologicalmachine and the a-signil.ving machinesof collectiveagenciesof utterance.Indeed it is hard to say whether or not this is alreadv in lact a signmachine.The signifying signand the a-signil,ving sign dependon the operationof two other extremely specific types of machine: first. on this sort of accelerator of deterritorializationthat carriesit to the absolutein order to nullify it, and then 'semiotic on the processing lactories' that convert that absolute deterritorializationinto quantum form. It would be ridiculous to suggestthat the same system ol signs is at rvork at once in the physico-chemical,the biological,the human and the machinic6elds.Only non-signi{,ving parricles, movingarvayfrom abstractmachines,would be capableofsuch an exploit. The conditions in which they are produced remain exrremely specific, depending on the achievementof machinic agencieswith nothing universal about them. The signs of semiologyand of almost all semioticsconstitute stratalike any others.Just as there are strata of elementaryparticles,of physical,chemicaland biologicalelements,and so on, so there are semiotic s t r a t aa. n d s t r a t ao f a - s i g n i f v i n g g e g r e e sb, r i n g m a c h i n i s m st h a t , i n u u . ' r : i n d into plav quanta of absolute de-territorialization.Consequently, then, thoughsrgnsremain localizedupon particular strata,abstractmachinesare, onthe contrarv,implicatedin all strata. De-territorializationis either categorized(in 'nature' or in the binary semioticmachines into which it is forced by the signifying-consciousness svsrem)or set lree by the non-signif,ving machinesof the collectiveagenciesof utterance.Dependingon movement from one stratum to another, abstract machineswill receivea greater or lesserdegreeof actualizationand force. This degree of liberation corresponds to the degree of intensity ol the 'beginning', a siow, de-territorialization.' lt is as though there were, at the 3. Two tlpes of intensities must be distinguished, diflerential intensities as between different s t r a t aa, n c it h e a b s o l u t ei n t e n s i t yo f t h e c o m p l e t eo r g a n l e s sb o d y . A b s o l u t ei n t e n s i t yd i s p l a y sa t o n c e ali the force oi de-territorialization as such, and all its powerlessnessto break away from the system. semiologicalde-territorialization ofthe signifying-consciousness
r34
Torvardsa Nerv Vocabulary
hierarchizeclde-territorializationin the intrinsic encodings,and rhen an acceleratedde-territorializationby a kind ofup and down process.At each peak of de-territorializationthere is the emergenceof an abstract machine lollowedby a fiesh stratificatio'. lvith the movementfrom onestratum to the next, the coefficientofaccelerationofde-territorializationsimply increases. The abstractmachinesspeedup the processofintensivede-territorialization until the strata burst apart, thus crossinga threshold,a kind ol,rvall ol absolutede-territorializalton'.Ifthe de-territorializationreboundslrom that threshold' we are still in the vu'orldof semiologicalimpotentization (rhe signifi ine-consciors'esssvstem);if it getsacrossit, we mo\.einto the w,oridof a-srgnilyingparticle-signs(agenciesof collectiveurterance).
Subjectless Actionr
One can alwaysreplaceany pronoun with 'it',2 which coversall pronominalin', be it personal,demonstrative,possessive, interrogativeor indefinite, whether it refersto verbsor adjectives.'It'representsthe potentialarriculation of those linked elementsof expressionwhose contents are the least formalized, and thereforethe most susceptibleof being rearrangedto produce the maximum ofoccurrences.'It' doesnot representa subject;it diagrammatizesan agency.It doesnot over-encodeutterances,or transcendthem as do the various modalitiesofthe subjectofthe utterance;it preventstheir lalling under the tvrannv of semiologicalconstellations',vhoseonl1,function is to evokethe presenceof a transcendentuttering process;it is the a-signifying semiologicalmatrix of utterances- the subj ectpar excelLence of the utterancesin so lar as thesesucceedin lreeingthemselvesfrom the swavolthe dominant personal and sexual significations and entering into conjunction with machinicagenciesof utterance. One can alwa;,sunderstandan I-ego underlyingany pronominalfunction. A supposedutterer externalto the languageusedis then taken to be making its imprint on the discourse,and that imprint is what is called the subjectof the utterance.A flux ofpure subjectivitytranscendsthe statementsmade and processes them accordingto the dominant economicand socialnorms. This operation begins rvith a spiit in the 'it', the pretendeddiscovery that ,it' containsa hidden cogito,a thinking I-ego. The elementsof expressionare taken over by an uttering subject. An emptv redundancy, a second-degree redundancy appears alongside all the redundanciesof expression.The phonic expressionno longer evokesa gestural,postural, ritual, sexual,etc. expression. It has first to rurn back upon itself,cut itselfofrlrom the collective desiringproduction, and becomearrangedon separate,hierarchizedsemiologicalstrata. The splitting of the I-ego is the point of origin of sysremsof reciprocal articulation - double articulation - between redundancies of contentand redundanciesof signifyingexpression. The materialand semiotic r . G i v e n a t t h e r 9 7 4 N I i l a n C o n f e r e n c e,,P s y c h a n a l y scet S i m i o t i q u e , , r o , / r g . z The French is r/, which means both he and it, The nearest approximation to this in English seemsto me to be 'it', but readers will find this section clearer if thev bear in mind rhat ,ir' can be usedto mean he, or it ro a subject, or the indefinite 'it'of'ir is raining', 'it is tue'. lrrarcLator)
r36
Towards a New Vocabulary
fluxcszrremade to fit a mental world constitutedby being filled with mental representations that havebeenrenderedpowerless.Intensitiesfadeawav into echoes;machinic connectionscome apart; utterancesno longer refer to . anvthins but themselvesand the lormalizationof the dominant discourse 'fhe sign can no longerbe linked directly rvith rr'hatit refers !o, but must hale recourseto the mediationof the signifvingmachine.The signri ill alw'ayshave to reler to the semiologiesof the pou'er machines,with their parlicular svnlagmaticand paradigmaticcoordinates.if it is to produceany e{Iectat all upon realit1,.To constitutethe semiology'ofthe dominant order, the function ol'indii'idriatingsubjectivationdetachesand articulatestu'o semioticlevels, ol the ihe spoken tord and the written word. \\hile the polyrrocalit,v'primitive'language is flattenedout by the despoticformalismof a rvriting machine (a por.r'ermachine inseparablefrom the territorial fixation of the 'primitive' writing machinesas a whole lall nomadic military machine), under the control of a singleofficialwriting machine:the signifyingmachine ofdouble articulation.The letter castratesthe voice bv dividing speechup into phonemes,and rhe voice mutilates the diagrarnmaticpotential ol an arche-u,ritingby rearranging words according to meaning. The desiring organized intensitiesale thus governedby a world ofmental representations whosepower is derived from rendering arourrd a ilctive subject- a sr,rb.iect them powerless. \Vith this semioioey,there is no longeran1'direct trans-encodingbetween one semioiicand another,nor thereforeany surplus-valueolencoding. The so-calleclsemiologiesof analogy,for example,becomedependentupon the signifying semiologiesof double articulation. Similarl,vwith all the presignifl,ingsemioticsof perception- aesthetic,loving. economicand so on. lay claim; it The re is no limit to the porverto r,vhichthe signifyingsemiologies covers :rll modesolencoding,eventhe a-semiotic ('natural') and a-signifying (machinicand artificial); the splitting of utterancecomesmore and more to all semioticelements.The totaiityofexpressionis thus infectand or.er-encode that createsa kind of irnaginaryOther World emptied bv a pure reflexiveness out of s,vstemsof formalizing now powerlesscontents directed both to 'natural' material fluxesand artificial machinicffuxes.The establishmentof triangulation, signilvingsribjectivationresultsin the'it'ofa personological ofthat first splittingofthe I-ego. itselfthe resultofrepeatedre-enactments The toois brought into operation by the arrangementsol individuated subjectiv:rtionwill becomeboomerangs.At one level, that of the individual and the persorl,thev succeededin nullifying desirein its relationshipwith But they cannotprevent material fluxes,ovithintensivede-territorializations. figuresof expresthe molecular,sub-human,semioticescapeof a-signi{,1'ing sion from starting up a new desiringmachine at a quite diilerent ler"ei,and with a quite difierent power.The sudden,absolutede-territorializationthat
SubjectlessAction
tg7
to brokedesireup into subjectand object has failed,despiteits absoluteness, that hastruly abolishitsellin the paroxysmofjov ofa machinicconsciousness broken all territorial moorings. (We do, however,6nd such consciousness without ties in certainextremeeffectsofschizophrenia,drugs, trances,etc.) Thenceforth these territorial remnan!s reorganize themselves into asigniff ing particles; they rvill provide the raw material for a-signifying semiotic machines beyond the reach of the impotentizing attacks of the reflexiveconsciousness. In one sense,the Cartesianswereright: therogllodoes mark a radical escapelrom the system of coordinatesof time, space and substancegoverningrepresentation.But the cogilois still a fiction,for all that, a machine-fiction.The processofmaking consciouscarriesdesireto such a pitch ofexcess,ofirrecoverablefinal de-territorialization, ofdetachmentlrom all reference-points, that it no longer has any'thingto hang on to, and has to inrprovisewhatever expedientsit can to avoid being destroyedin its own nothingness.It is not even a questionofa binary oppositionbetweenbeing is at once both all and and nothingness,of all or nothing; consciousness nothing.The forceofdesire,at this blazingpoint ofnothingness,wearsitself out upon itself- a kind ofblack hole ofde-territorialization. F rom then on thereare two possibilities:that of asceticism, of castration,or that of a ne\{' economy of de-territorialization with super-povrerful signmachinescapableof coming into direct contactwith non-semioticencodings. Such sign-machines in some \4ay take hold ol the absolute de-terriand set it to w,orklor artitorializationofthe representationalconsciousness ficialmachinic forces- forcesmanipulating a flux of 6gureswhich become, i n a n e u ' q u a n t i c f o r m , t h e b e a r e r so l t h a t a b s o l u t e d e - t e r r i t o r i a l i z ation. Rather than adopting Lacan's overdoneoppositionbetweenreaLigand the real, I preler to borrow Hjelmslev's terminology, and suggest that the alternative is benveena dominantrealitystratified by the various semiological substances of the contentand the form, and'non-semioticallyformed'intensiue (though let it be noted that being'non-semiotically materials formed'doesnot 'scientifically imply for Hjelmslev that they are therefore lormed').3 One can, then, distinguishseveraltypesofde-territorialization: - an absolute de-territorialization,either in global form with the instanceof consciousness, or in quantic lorm with non-signifyingmachines; -an intensiae de-territorialization,at the levelof material fluxes; - a relatiue de-territorialization,at the level of signifyingsemiologiesand mixedsignif ing/a-signify'ing semiotics,whoseaim is to securecontrolof the e{Iects of de-territorializationby meansof semioticstrata dependingon the signif,ving machine. q. Cf. Louis Hjelmslev, Esscis/ inguistiques, Editions de Minuit, r 97 r, p. 58.
tiltr i$l ii
r38
T'or.,u'ards a New Vocabulary
T'o tl-rethree nrodalitiesof encoding,we can thus seethreecorrespondin{ r h l t h n r . .u f d e - t e r r iot r i a l i z aito n: -- a.rlou cle-telritorializalion,that takesplaceonly b1'breakingthrough or getting beyondthe strata built up earlier.But with eachsuchbreak,time, the co-efncientof de-territorialization,speedsup. (One must in lact talk in terms interaction.)At this levelit has becomeimpossibleto overcome of space/tir-ne rhe accumulati()nof heterogeneouslaqades,the stratificationof encoding resiststranslation.The sysrems,or at least of lvhat, within those s,vstems, various coe{frcientsof de-territorializationcreate relative fields of deterritorialization which themselves produce an intensive de-terri'semiologicalsoup' speedsup, so to say' and blocksoffthe torialization.The soup',whiie thislattersimultaneously entire'ecologicai/ethological/biological 'physical/chemicalsoup' . . . and the not destroy) (though it does conceals so on. The relative intensitiesthus remain subject to a stratified mode of encoc{ing(signals,figures,indexesthat do not raisea specificsemioticplane peryrrusstress,lor instance,or the hol'monalmessage)'There is no translating lrom one stratum to another. There are surplus-!'aluesol encoding, without an.v significance,and all possibilitiesof diagrammatizationare r e d u c e dt o t h e n l i n i m u m ; - an ahsolute de-territorialization,that accompaniesthe absoluteloss of porner, with a svstemof signilyingsigns; * a de-territorialization of heightened power, wtth machinic systems of which, in quanticlorms, take utterance,a kind ofacceleratorofparticle-signs, possessionof absoiutede-territorializationin order to de-stratifyboth the machines of the plane of signifying expressionand those ol the plane of content-encoding. One cannot get round tl'reparadox of an absolutede-territorialization beingtranslormedby discrete quanta into semioticunits without abandoning all attempts to explain hon' the capacitl'of machinesolscientific,economic, artistic and other signs can inter','eneiri the intrinsic encodingsolmaterial That there is this absolute de-territorialization in the economyof agencements. it produces: non-signifyingsignsis clearfrom two consequences - the direct passagebetweensign fluxesand material fluxesin the process (frorn absoluteand quantic de-territorializationto the of diagramn'ratization of fluxes); de-teritorialization intensive - the lact that non-semioticagencies,on the one hand, and non-signifying agencies,on the other, cannot be broken down in a binary fashion. It is impossible,outside some structuralistillusion, to reduce them to minimal digitalizedunits.One can, of course,alu'aystranslateany physical-chemical, biological,behaviouralor ecotromicprocessinto the termsola mathematical logic that can be reducedto s)'stemsof binary oppositionand to an axiomatic syntax.But this will neverprovide an explanationofthe real functioning,the
SubjectlessAction
r 39
diagrammatic agenciesthat produce those processes,their capacity for de-territorialization,hor+'they fit into the machinicphyium and the abstract mutationsthey effecton the plane of consistency.A diagrammaticparticlesign carriesa quantum ofabsolute de-territorializationthat puts it beyond of the material fluxesto which it is theintensivede-territorializationprocesses linked.The sy'stemof diagrammaticsignsparallelsreal de-territorialization, performingits silent and motionlessdanceon the plane of consistencyaway, from any machinic manilestation in time, in space or in substancesol expression.It is as though the massivearousalofconsciousness, in spiteofor because of - its impotence, had exploded its capacitv lor deterritorializationand collapsedinto a black hole rvhich then emittedfluxesof a nerv kind: a thousand sharp points of particle-signde-territorialization. From human desire, now made impotent, there has emerged a kind ol machinic superpower. The territorialized agenciesof utterance and the individuatedsubjectsof utterancewill of coursecontinueto burn themselves o n t h i s g l o b a l a b s o l u t eo f d e - t e r r i t o r i a l i z a t i oann d o n t h i s s t i l l t h r e a t e n i n g collapseof representationthat they trv to achieveb,vmeans,lor example,of godsof some kind. Thev will try to tame the abstractmachinisms,but at the molecularlevel thei, cannot prevent the quanta of possibilitythus liberated from managing, sooner or Iater, to enrer into direct contact r,r,ithnatural, economic,socialand other encodings. Facedwith the danger of this upsurgeof the nomad molecularfluxes,the signili,ingmachinehas to redoubleboth its meansof defenceand its eflortsof impotentization.Today's signifying sub.jectivitycan no longer rest content with dealing merely ',r'ith imaginary ghosts, phantoms, benevolentgods, perfectlv adapted to fit the area of representation,as was that of the pre-signifvingdispensationof primitive societies.The collectivesystemsof re-enclosing,of re-territorialization,are held back. In a double twisting movement.the individuatedsubjectivityturns back upon itselfin reactionto thesemolecularsemioticfluxes.Microscopicvision and hearingconcentrate all the strataof meaningupon an ideal point of signifyingsubjectivation.It is nolongerenoughlor subjectivityto annihilatethe world globally;it must now takehold of evervsemioticelementwith the lorcepsof double articulationof the planes of content and of form. It will have to take everv utterance, whereverit comes lrom, and syntactize,morphologize,hierarchize and axiomatizeit (cf. Noam Chomsky'sSyntactic Structures). AII signsolintensive de-territorializationu,ill be repressed by the s,vstem of relative deterritorializationof semioticredundancies.Once an a-signilyingmachinehas b e e n ' l i b e r a t e d ' -a s l o r e x a m p l et h e b a n k i n gs y s t e mo l t h e V e n i c e ,G e n o a , - it is immediately taken over by a double Pisatriangle in the Renaissance articulationmachine that Iimits its effectsby subjectingthem in practiceto the particular content systemof an oligarchicalsociety.The diagrammatic
112 Tou,arCsa Neu'Vocabulary the poweriessworld of representatio!and a subjectivationthat can onl,v, 'lacking' it, I do not meanjust not having it, but Iacking ever,lack reality. By in in an active sense. the sensethat it is continually filled with a lack. The relationshipof the machine of the money/merchandise expressionrcontent mixed semiotics of the capitalist economy, lor example, will infect all territolialirieswith its orvnspecificaxiomatics.The jntensivemultiplicitiesof economicand socialproduction,havingno other sourceofexpression,rvill be obliged to acceptthesedouble redundancysystemsofform and content,and the full organlessbody of the intensitieswill be brokenapart b-vthe systemof surveiilanceofsignificanceand subjectivation.The organ)essbodv can onll' of a survive as best it mav b.voscillatingbetweenemptinessand the fuh-ress rnalignant tumour. The intensitiesrvill be surrenderedto the organization, the hierarchy,the bi-polarity, the equivalenceand the interpretationofthe 'moving'rvill thus be entirelvshilted dominant values.The organlessbody of to$,ardsthe logico-sexualorganizationof a particular socialorder. Whereas the logic ofthe undeterminedverb left all the possibiiitiesofexpressionofthe pre-personal fluxes open to the widest variety of institutional and political framew,orks,the logic of the subjectwill producea reversibility,an equivalence,a pronominalinterpretation compatiblewith the fluxesof capitalismin terms of ;r grid of mutually exclusiveopposites:inter-subjectiveor intrasubjective,sexualor non-sexual,masculineor feminine,within the triangle (I-you-he) or outsideit. From rlte materiallogic of abstractmachines,a logic u'ith the unleashingofa de-territorializationprocess,we have thaf coincicles moved over to an axiomatiledlogic rvhosecoordinatesof signification retain only what helpsto preservethe dominant socialorder. -fhis repressiveaxiomatizationestabiishedby signifi'ingsemiologieswith the pronorninal function is only one example, The same sort of process dictates the entire organizationof the Ianguage- syntactic,morphematic, of semantic,connotative,rhetorical,poetic.All systemsof strata,all s,vstems strarifieddoublearticuiation(includingthoseof mixed semiotics),contribute to this sarnervork of controlling, or what we may call'semiologizing',the multiplicities. In every casethe aim is the same: the diagrammaticflux of a-subjectivestatementshas to be transformed into a subjectiveI-cgo flux in such a way as to particularize, forn-ralizeand sr.rbstantifyevery situation, and to stratify eachof its ramifications- economic,sexual,aestheticand so on. A a dominant mentalrealit.vpermanentgeneraisubjectivitv,which establishes lv cut ollfrom ail the real intensities,permanently guilty in law, will aflect all forms of serniotization, and will always have to be seen as exterior and attributable to personologicalfunctions, by way ofthe systernofsemiological dorrblearticulation.Qualitatively,everyoneshouldin theory be equal before the flux of this subjectivity. But quantitatively, each will receivea share comrnensurateit'ith the place he or sheoccupieswhere the various formations
SubjectlessAction
r43
of power intersect.In raw, we are at subjects- not necessarily the subjectso,f the signifier,bur at leastsubject/a Knowiedge,power, N{oney.But tlr..hu..s in. this kind of subjectivity are in lact radically differenq depending on u,hetherone is a child, a memberof a primitive soclety, a woman, poor, mad and so on. The'it' aroseout of quanta of absolute de-territoriarizati,on by way of abstractdancesof particre-signs folrowingintensivemateriarp.o....... ii, the I-ego economy, on the other hand, fower switches towards relative de-territorialization;absolutede-territoriaiization is made ro work rowards its or'r'ni-mpotenceby the operation of systemsof redundanciesorawareness n,hoseefforts are directecl to.systemsof mutually exclusive, binary opposi_ tions,whereas the 'it' shapeda machinicforceof actionsemioticalry.,"ittout passin^g any judgement upon the value of the non-it, the slightestmanifestation of an I-ego is over-determined by a whole set of soci"arstratifications, hierarchicalpositionsand power relationships.
MachinicPropositions I45
Machinic Propositionsl
The prc,ductionofutterancesbv territorializedagentshad in itselfa certailr a certain semioticgrasp of material and social diagrammatic effectir,'eness, energies. But this was as,vetno more than a diagrammatismcontrolledby the functioningoi'the territori:rlgroup as a whole,intendedto compartmentalize it in the same\r,a)'asany other machinismcapableof settingto work on its own account.,\s utterance becomesindividuated. the diagrammatism,'vill frornthe lzrnguage point of r,ierrrt becomediflerentiated,specializedlwhereas becomcsirn;rovelishedand lzrdes,lrom the point of viervof sign nrachinesit can orrlVclevelopand expand.There are thus three senlrotlcareas: ( r 1 t h a t o f t h e s c i e n c e st ,e c h n o l o g ya n d t h e e c o n o m y w , h i c hi s c o n s t a n t l , v beingactedupon by diagrammaticmachinesthat lunctionfrom mathematical and algorhythmic utterances; ( z ) r h a t r r f r h e l a n g u a g e so l a u t h o r i t y , t h e l a n g u a g e o s f b u r e a u c r a c ya' n d relieion,rvhosediagramm:rtismis entirelydirected to controllingthe resrdual s e m i o t i z a t i o nosf d e s i r e : t 3 ) t h a t o l s p o k e n l a n g u a g e sw, h e r e t h e v a r i o u ss t r a n d so f d e - t e r l i t o r i a l iz.ationand territorializationof the other two areascome together.Thus the u,ork of purging and impovcrishingterritorializedlanguagesimposedby the fluxe,sof capitalisrntend '.o rcsuit in setting up two quite distinct tvpes of 'judgement'or over-encoding: meta-languages of - algorhl thmic meta-languages that expressstatementsof scientificj udgerole is rnrnt sLrppilrteci bv a rigorouslvcontrolledand controllinglogic,rn'hose t o i n r p o s ea n d g u a l a n t e ca c e r t a i nc o n t e n to f ' u n i v e r s a l 't r u t h i n t h e u t t e r ancesthey produce. -- bureaucraticmeta-languages that expressstatementsofauthority, u hose 'universality"in role is equally to imposeand guaranteea certain contentof the significationsand formalizationsthey produce. 'fluth and authoritv can thus be consideredas formationsthat replacethe organlessbodiesof territorializedsemiotics.The despoticsvntactizationof t h e s e m i o t i c si n t h e s p h e r eo f p l a r i s , a n d t h e s e m i o t i z a t i o no f t h e p o w e r machinesin the sphereof the sociusthus combinetheir effectsso as to define, r. ilnpublishcd.
concentrateand acceleratethe diagrammatism of what used to be the territorial machine.These formalizationmachinesthat can modify existing structuresare concentratedin the handsof a power formationthat dominates 'scribe'caste.But that operationcan be carriedout only ifthe processit the involves is deemed to be a universal one: hence the role ofde-territorialized monotheism,and of the unity of the transcendentpower - science,reasonr 'universal'if peopleare to acceptand legitimacvor whatever.Truth must be interiorize the particular power lormation that controls the sign machines with the dominantformaresponsiblefor linking lormalizationsof expression Iizationsofcontent. The idea that statementsas such can be the bearersof formalization,of universalinformation,is the sameas the idea that a value of universal exchangecan be derived lrom the circulation of market commod'surface'statementsand the fundamentalsof logical ities.The split between the signifierparticulartruth developsout ofa methodoftranscendentalizing ly dear to the hearts of scientisrs;this is in lact part of the basisof their organizationas a caste,of what dillerentiatesthem from other groups.No ionger-is it from a despot,or a despoticsocialformatiotl,that the utteranceof truth proceeds:underlyingall the writings,all the realitiesofpower, thereis a proloundtuth levellingup the logicalfabricof the signifyingchains.Political truth is not just something produced by society; the values of desire, 'discoveries'of a completely arbitrary kind, all theseare reinforcedby Truth existingin itself.The languageof science,like that of capitalism,considers itself - as pure discourse- to be the exclusiverepositoryof the forcesof diagrammatismit brings into action.Yet really, bv definition,diagrammatism cannotbe concentratedinto a single semiotic stratum: it is alwavs trans-semiotic.If a diagrammatic relationship is establishedbetween a systemof utteranceand a materialor socialmachinicsystem,it is not because What happens is that the ol any lormal similarities or correspondences. diagrammatisminvolvesthe sameinner machinismwithin both systems- an abstractmachinismof positivede-territorialization Denying the existenceofpropositionsthat transcendl.inguisticutterances and machinic lorcesis only one aspectof a more generaldenial that there is any universal formal law. Diagrammatism brings into play more or less trans-semioticforces,systemsofsigns,ofcodes,ofcatalysts de-territoriaiized and so on, that make it possible in various specific wa,vs to cut across sratificationsofeverykind. Thus therecan be no questionofany self-existent Truth. A propositionis true in a particularmachinicfield;when anv material or semioticmachinechangesthings,it will ceaseto be true. Truth is what is happeningnow. It stopswhen the machinicconnectionsare broken.Consequentl),,there are as many logics,or as many dimensionsof logicaltruth, as there are types ofengagement. In other words, to search for some universal propositional logic underlying all of scientific discourseis to lollow a mirage.
I+6
Torvards a New Vocabttlart'
MachinicPropositions r47
Nlachinic propositions have no hierarchy: they do not start from the simple and work up to the complex.There is complexityin their most elementary 'Machistages,and their totalitiesmay well function in an elementaryway. principles, postulate is nor does any transcennics' not basedon universal it dent larv.The objectis not to establisha machiniclogic,bur onlv to graspthe way phvlums and rhizomesfunction. Sincethe stratawhere they appearare inseparable,machinic propositionskeep cutting acrossthem, establishing highly differentiatedlines ofescape (lines ofpositive de-territorialization). These,in return, will becomea foundationlor coordinqtingthem in space, time and substance(coordinatesof negativede-territorialization).Machinic propositionscannot be 'simplified'or'reduced' like mathematicalformulae or logicalstatements.But when they are not re-absorbedinto a black hole of positive de-territorialization,or formed into a network of lines of escape unrelatedto anv strata, they accumulateto form residualblocsthat provide the raw material lor constructing strata. trVethus passfrom a systemoflatent quanta, inherent in the lines ofescape,to a stratifiedconstructionin which the lines are arrangedto fit togetherin a s.vstemof multiple articulation.In the first, virtuality, continually fluctuating with the threat ofa black-holestyle abolition) ensures the possibilitiesof opennessand rearrangement representedby the line ofescape;in the second,the quanta are rearrangedin blocks(infinite-limited-discontinuous)in systemsolarticulation from stratum to stratum, Discontinuity among the strata replaces the intensive nrenral olrjectnor a material one. 'degrees'of existenceor quantic regime (finite-contiguous-continuous-unlimited).+ We have, then, This t-'eingso, thefe is no occasionto consider ' d c g r e e s ' o f t r u t hE. t e 2 t l f i f n t e x i s l s , a n d e t ' e r y t h i n g i s t r u c : t h e u n i c o r n e x i s t s i nto a trvofold stratification: a molar, visible stratification, relating to o nconsider e matter, life, sign machines,etc., and a transversal,molecularstratification particular stratum of machirtic propositionsand one particular s1'stemof that captures the energy ofde-territorialization, and lorcesit to spin round on discoursequite as much as the horse or the dinosaur exist in others.The its own axis rather than letting it escape)in eflectlike a black hole.So,all the orqanlessbodv ofexistence,the existenceofthe pure objectbe.vondbeing and processes ofde-territorialization- absolute,relativeand so on - will have in non-beirrg,is not an undifferentiatedunivelsalcategor) It is the point ofall one $'ay or another to adjust to the state of stratification of machinic u'ithout coordinates(the plane of conabsract, machinic clilTerentiations 'belore'beingcaughtin the movement propositions,sincethere is no way ofmaking the fluxeszol have beenstratified sistency).The intensivemultiplicities, an abstract asthey have been;thus, unlike the abstract machinism, thisis afait accompli, anothel! constitute a to from one stratr-tm ofexistence of'coordinates subjectionto eventsfor the machinic phylum which we shall later compare r n a t t e ro f p u r e d i { I e r e n t i a t i o n . with the function of concretemachines.In the last analysis,at the level of The functionine of machines, therefore, cannot be reduced eithei to machinicagenciesin action, the distinction betweenabstractmachine and logical/nrathematicalarticulations.or to stratified manifestationsthat we 'science'. phenomenological stratification disappears:it is as though the positive de-territorialization of of r.r'ith the aid sorne to explore have should theabstractmachinismand the negativede-territorializationof the stratumof logir: and phenontenologr',what is needed here is a scienceof Ir-rsteacl - in other r,vordsa s,vstemof arranging nlachinicpropositionsthat to-stratum articulations neutralize one another without there being any machinics questionof a'dialecticalsynthesis', cannot be reduced to loeical/mathematicalstaiementsor the realms of phenornenoloev.
Propositionsof judgement relate to all the different tvpes of utterance machine I prel'er,therefore,to talk of machinic propositions,Linguistic starenlelttsare not to be comparedwith the valuesof utliversaltruths. but i.vith specific c()mbinations3f machinic propositions (that is, of'abstract r'achines). In recognizingrhe truth valuesolthe referent,lv{einong!canreto try to escape from a simplistic alternative between existenceand nonexisting without necessarilv he said,subsist(DesleArz) exisrencc:ideal ob.jects, of the pure (cxistieren). He also suggestsa third rvay of being, the ausserseiend 'beyond being and non-being',ar.rda fourth, an nth kind olbeing that ot.,ject But his battle with the negatiolls.:1 c;rrrbe attributed to an objectl.r;'successive 'prejr-rdice in lavour of the real'doesnot lead him on to attackthe illusion that thereexistssomeuniversal being transcendingall contingelltmanifestations. I, on the other hand, prefer to start lrom the idea that there are as nlanl modesqf existenceas tltereare modesof activity and machinicpropositions. Tr_iask rvliether.the object of intentionalitv has a reai referenceis absurd. \ A r h a i.st ' u n d e r l v i n g i' i n g u i s t i cu t t e r a n c ep, e r c e p t i v se e m i o t i z a t i o tel .t c . ,i s a n A h : r r a r ' iu r a t h i r t et o , , .l r i c h r h e c o o r d i n a t e so f e x i s r e t t c 'es p a c e ,( i l n e . i u b s t z r n c oe l e x p r e s s i o nd) o n o t a p p l v T h i s o b j e c t ,a t t h e h e a r to l t h c o b j e c t ,i s r . r osr i t u a r e di n s o m ek i n d o f h e a v e no f r e p r e s e n t a t i o ni sr :i s b o t h ' i n t h e m i n d ' and in things, but outsicieall coordinates.As a de-territorializingmachineit cuts acrossthe coordinatesboth oflanguage and ofexistence.It is neither a
z . A l e x i u s M e i n o n q ( r 8 5 3 - r g z o ) . a p i o n e e ri n o b j e c tt h e o n . H i s m o s t i r n p o r t a n tw o r k s a r e. 0 b e r Annnltnenltqoz), l'lune Studieni r8;.;-gr), and UberGrynstinlr hdhrerOrdnunglt9ggit Seuil, I 974, p. 34 a. Ldr;rrardLinsky, Le Prablimedelo riJlrence,
4. CfG. Deleuze and F. Guattari, KaJka:pourunelilthaluremireurc,Editions de N{inuir, r g75,
I48
lv{achinicPropositions t49
Towards a New Vocabular'1,
Positive de.territorialization;
negative de.territorialization
' i n d e p e n d e n t l y ' o f t hset r a t a , Considered t h e n ,a n d o n l l ' a t t h el e v e lo l l i n e so f escapearrdstratum-to-stratumenga€Jernents, de-territorializationhasa positive ancia neqativenature. Positivede-territorializationcorrespondsto a sheerblack-holeeffect,to an absenceor abolition of coordinates(one can distinguish betu,eena line of escape lor the absenceof coordinatesand a line of abolition lor their de-territorialization,but this verv distinctionshowsthat one cannotconsider positivede-territorializationapart from strata:in effect,the line ofabolition inrpliesstrata, and the line of escapeis alwavsa line evadingstrata). Unlike this intlinsic cie-territorialization, negativede-territoria)izationis dillerentiai, establishirrgsystemsof determinantsand substances of expression.Out of the mutationsof its quanticsystem,positivede-territorialization constructs ozsabstractmachinicrealitv,a singlereaiity accountableto nobody;whereas negativcde-territorializationconsritutestheconcrete,stratifiedreality based ruponits systemsof connection,interaction,encoding,reproduction,etc. B u t t b e c o n r l a s t i s s t i l l t o o c l e a r ' - c u rI.n p o i u t o f f a c r , p o s i r i v ed e territorializationentersin varfing degreesinto the constitutionofthe propositions of coordinates and substances.There is a positive de-terrirorialization of spaceat the ier,'elof astro-phvsicsand particles,while, at our level, time representsa positiveprocessofde-territorialization.It isjust that \{'eneverha'"e anr,contactwith that time and spacein the initial stagesexcept via the machinesof expressionthat deal with intensivematerial,substantif_vir-rgit in the br.rsiness of sub.jectivizing and stratifvingsemiotization(concrete rnachinesof s1'rnbolicsemiotics,signilving machines, the machinism of a u t h c r i t ya n d s o o n ) . brief rdsumd of some machinic propositions 1A A. Fluxes B. Strata totality C, C)bject-species A. FLUX PROPOSITIONS
Proposition t - Positiuede-territoriali
z - Positionalitymachines Proposition These demonstrate the impossibiiitl' of black holes as a proposition of exisrence. Positivede-territorializationcannotexist apart from the machinic propositionsthat negate it. The first pro-positionalagency that connects these two tvpes of de-territorialization is the extensiae fux. At the level of systemsof stratification,machinesof positionalitywill later be specifiedas propositionsof interaction,of crystallization,of catalysis,of moulding, of reproduction,of diagrammatice{Iectand so on. Propositton <erl - 0r t - Intetuiucfuxes This proposition,an anti-dialecticparadox,shouldbe presentedbeforethose relatingto de-territorializations, even though it can exist only in association with machinesof extensivepropositionaliry.The intensivefluxesconstitute thechannelolnegotiation ofpositive territorializationlor the other propositrons. Proposi ti on3 - A bstract machines Theserepresentthe peculiar mode ol quantic organizationof the positive de-territorialization ofthe intensivefluxes.The negativede-territorialization of the positionality propositions (proposition z) is thus 're-positivized'. Positivede-territorializationis quantifiedand put into operationin the fluxes andstrata accordingto machinic formulae that cut acrossand overtakethe (Thereis, obviouslv,no necessary link systemofcoordinatesand substances. betweenone propositionand the next, but only a machinicaction.Thus what was,at the level of proposition e, for example, determination by negative positionality,determination b_v" encoding, by the creation of lack, by objectivation, bl' representation,etc. - all ol which appeal to much 'later' propositionsof stratification- gives way to the return of sheer positive de-territorialization.There is thus no.4uf ebung;propositionr, in connection with the propositions of stratification, functions as an abstract machine of breaking off and innovation without preserving any of the 'gains' of deFrom the standpointofpositive de-territorialization,there territorialization. isneverany establishedgain, but only the residuumofmachinesand strata.) Abstract machinescan equally be defined,much later on (seeproposition r7), as resulting lrom the conjunction ofseveral processesofpositive deterritorialization,rvhich implies the possibility and autonomv of certain pr0cesses.
r50
Machinic Propositions r5r
Towards a New \rocabuiar,v
of de-territoriaLi
B . S T R - A T AP R O P O S I T I O N S
poinn oJintetui['t Propositir,tn 5 - Tlu mecti.ng These constitutethe points ofreturn, ofoscillationbetrveenthe propositions 'knots' underlie the ofpositive and ofnegative de-territorialization.These the negativede-territorializingpowerolthe strata,in Strata,or rnoreprecisel,v to becomestatements as rnuch as theyforcethe positivede-territorializations of abstlirctvirtrralitv.5 Proposition6 - Redundancies knotsofintensity that composethe actual This brings us to the second-degree fabric of the strata. We can distinguishthreelevelsof stratification: of intensitl'; (a) The moiecularIevelof the meeting-Points (b) The levelof molar redundancl: the organizatiotrbetweenthe meetingpoints, which produces an inter-stratum entitv turned in upon itsell' an 'faceanti-black hole ({br example,concretemachines,distinctivefeatureof n e s s '). r e l a t i o nt o t l l e s l r a t a p r o p o s r l r o n s 5 . \ ' i r t u ; i l i t v h e r eb e c o m e s ' s t ' c o n c l a r , v ' i n
(c) The level of lines of residualde-territorialization,rr'hichwill serveas coordinatesor as a possibleconnection- either by way ofa line ofescape,or by way of a line of abolition. Propo.sition 7 - Interactioru Theserepresentthe reverseofredundancies.From them, the stratificationsof the fluxes can be polarized in terms of zones, of a field, an object, a constellationand so on. In stratified,negativede-territorialization,the oppositionbetweenredundancy and interactionrepresentsa reinlorcementofthe oppositionin levelA (flux propositions)between positive de-territorializationand negativedeterritorialization'in the pure state'. The propositionsof interaction and redundancywill relateto one anotherdiflerentlyaccordingto their respective paceof d e-territorialization. The interaction ofnegative speedsofinteraction and negativespeedsof redundancycorrespondsto a 'cold' stratification(for example, palaeol.ithic soclet)'). The interaction of negativespeedsof interaction and positive speedsof redundancyproduceslines of abolition or lines of return (for example,a fascistrhizome:whereaseconomicand materialfactorsbecome'reified',the organlessbody ofthe sociusis positivelyde-territorialized,so that the whole thing becomeshollow inside). The interaction of positive speedsof interaction and negativespeedsof redundancyproduceslines ofescape(for example,capitalisticsocietiesthat become re-territorialized and archaic in proportion as they are deterritorialized) The interaction of positive speedsof interaction and positivespeedsof redundancyproduces machinic actions which get beyond the opposition (a revolutionarysocietythat wili funcbetweenredundancyand ir-rteraction tion on the basisolflux and schiz). As we shall seefurther on (propositiont 7), the abstractmachineswill also bedefined as a rapid systemofconnecting up fluxes,for the relation between abstractmachine and machinic agencyoperatesaround the 'e{Iective'taking overof the strata.
C . P R O P O S I T I O N SO F T O T A L I T Y . O F O B I E C T A N D O F S P E C I E S
Proposition B - Polari4tions Theseresult lrom the counter-effectofmachinic interaction propositionson systemsof stratified redundancy We talk of polarization it,hen speedsol
r52
Towards a New \rocabulary
de-ten-itorializationpointing in opposite directions coexist in any given Bi-polarizationis one exampleof this, but there can be an indefinite agcr-rcy. number of thresholdsolspeedfronr which polar zonesemerge. g - Breaking-off Proporition
MachinicPropositions I53 Propositiont 4 - Encodings Theseresultfrom the interactionofstratawhosespeedolde-territorialization is negativeand which bring into operatione{Iectsofobjectsand totalities. Propositianr5 - Encodedreproductions
The eiTectoia redundancyrelating to polarizedforces. Propositionro - Thearetns These i:csultfrom the counter-effectof breaking-offpropositionsrelating to polarizedstrata. Propositiant t - Totalities,objectsandspeties 'fhese result lrom the counter-applicationol a breaking-offpropositionsecond-degreebreaking-oll- to fields which thereby take on a referential position." r\ svstemofspecific - stratified- coordinatesis then set up; the doubiearticulationbecomesa definedreaiitv,This bringsus backto the point rn'estarted lrom: the analysis of different modes of encoding and semiotizatlon. Proltositionr t - Thefficts These ale the leverseof object propositions.We return ro tl-rehomologies referred to earlier betweelr ( l ) positiveand nesativede-territorializationat the Ievelofthe fluxes; (2) interactic)ns and redundanciesat the levelofthe strata. But herewe have a further lactor ofinertia, ofsecond-degree stratification. Objects, totaliries,speciesreproducethemselveson their ow'n through processesof mouiding, catalvsis,crystallization,etc., whereas the intrinsic redundanciesof the strata w'ereinseparablelrom tl-reextrinsic interactions among the strata.With fficts, a new formalismis stratified,a new principleof stratificatiollis established.The form and organismand so on olrhis prop'origin' effecton the ofthe strata. ositionu'ill havea celtain kind ofretr-oactive Proltositiont3 - Processes This reft--rsto eilects involving a link rvith an escapeline of positive deterritori alizarior-r. 6 . C o n c r e t em a c h i n e se s r a b l i s h i n er e l a t i o n s h i p sa l o n g t h e l i n e so f s u r l a c e ' / d e p t ho, r g a n / o r g a n ism,rtc.
T h e s ea r e a s y s t e mo f r e d u n d a n c yt h a t r e s u l t si n t h e p r o d u c t i o no f s p e c i e s functioningon the basisofa negativede-territorialization. Propositiont6 - Diagrammaticprocesses Theseresult lrom the conjunctionofstrata propositionswith objectpropositionshaving de-territorializingspeedsofopposite tendencies,dominated by positiveescapelines and leading to the production o1'objects,totalitiesor s p e c i eus i t h t w o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : ( t ) they are reproduceable; ir) thev thernselvesconstitute a lresh stratum that is more deterritorializedthan the srata and objectsofthe original organization. Here *'e once again find the paradox ol the linking of propositionsinto a rhizome:the dizigrammaticreproductionin lact appearsto depend on the encodedreproduction,despite being more 'innovative' and'creative', becausethe surplus values of encodingremain dependenton the strata. But there have to be stratum and object propositions if the positive deterritorializationof the diagrammatic processes is to introduce its semiotic mutationsinto the machinic agencies- and r,'iceversa.Nor must we lorget t h a t ' d i a g r a m m a t i s m ' i tso b e l o u n dj u s t a s m r . l c ho u t s i d es e m i o t i ce n c o d i n g s (in geneticmutations,lor example), Proposition t7 - Abstractmachines These result lrom the conjunction of positive processesof de-rerritorialization. Thus, abstract machineshave a twolold origin: a 'natural' origin at the levelof propositionsof flux (no. 3); and an 'artificial',diagrammaticorigin, at the level of propositions of object (no. I6), which 'implies' their being extendedover all the systemsofstratification. In reality there is no 'before'or 'after'; like diagrammatism,the abstract ofcoordinates,ofstrata and ofobjectslrom machinescLrtacrossthc s1'stems all directions.
Concrete Machines
Concrete Machines'
wlrat is it tha.t is operatirrg in i^,hat one sees as the featuresof a lace, a iandscal;e,a body?How do we accountfor the mvsteryof a particularlook, a thing. a stfeet, a memory?\\rhat is actuallythereto seeseemsto be concealing sometiringelse. \vhat sort oi'line ol escapegives us the sensethat some encounrcrrnightoccur?What exactlyare thesepotentiaiitiesof extraordinar.v operating br differentrules,differentcodes?The entrv of worid. someorher 'rnysterization'. is undoubtedlyvital in this effectof memory inro per-ceprion On the one lvlernorvcornbinesde-territorializationand re-ten'itorializatiort. other it on the and representation, hand it selectsspecilic ieatures of take can which one on thing, as one can be presented that whole a reassembies stand, so to say' vet which is in lact whollv suljective arld' in a sense' <,rne's w.ill never be able to elude us as reality has. Memory',slines of escapeare alrvayslalseones,imagesoi'escape,escapesto play at beingalraid' some memoriestake on specialrveight,acquiringthe functionolmatrixes, a lunction of'orgalizing the nrodeolsubjectil'ation;it is thesethat we classifr as the featuresof faciality, animality, bodilinessand so on. In fact, memory itere is not quire a single w,hole,becauseit operatesat the level of things ir might be better to talk not of memory but of block:a childhood tiremselves; block, unlike a childhood memory, is srill in the present.The featureso1' or masseswhich are machinesoi' laciality, animaiity etc. iorm consteliations want to describeall thesevarious I intensities. the actualize the kincl that kinds ofbiocks generallyas concretemachines. The function of these machines,at least those that opel'atein terms ofsvmbolicsemiotics,is to associatetwo typesof redundanc;': t I ) Redundanciesof representationthat underliethe semantisrnol'images anclof the syntagmatizedparadignisof signifyingsemiologies' that put the de-territorializedelernentsol' iz1 Diagrammaticredur-rdancies itselL An example of this would be the reality sign machines ro work orr specifications- fbr Concord: a'd mathematical physical the bfteprints what is noted at the semioticregisteris the de-territorializedarticulationsol the various things that go to make up the aircralt aluminium, electrical r. UnPublished.
r 55
fluxes,semioticfluxesas expressed materiallyand so on. But sucha blueprint is onlv ofinterestir so lar as its arriculationsare sufficientlyde-territorialized and can be made to correspondwith the de-territorializedarticuiationsofrhe materialsof expression.Diagrammatizarionconsistsin this interchange,at the most de-territorialized level, between these two sorts of deterritorialization. If the high points of de-territorialization of the semiotic systemsare to be able to combine with thoseof the material systemsin this way, the relevantfeaturesof the materialsof expressioninvolved- their raw materia.ls,ue might say - must be compatible with the nature of the articulatoryfearuresof de-territorialization of the materialfield.The semiotic Ievelof expressionmust be able to'support' the type of machinicconsistency of the material (or social)system,and nor abandonit in any way. To take a simpleexample:vou cannotmake a mould lor a kev out olj ust anything- you needa particular kind of wax; if vou w.ere to try doing it rvith mashedpotato, ,voucould not hold or transferthe diagrammaticoutline that makesthe ke1, what it is- If vou lvant to reproducethat outline on paper you need a brush that is not too broad, and ink that is neither too thin nor too thick. In other rvordsyou must choosematerialsof expressionsuited to the featuresof the machinismyou want to transfer.Diagrammatic redundancythus depends, on the one hand, on the de-territorializingarticulations of the various materialand semioticstrata that are to be connectedtogether(aluminium, steel,information, equations,etc.) and, on the other, on the capacityof the materialsof expressionto use, to activate, to organize that system of connection, What I have called the redundanciesof representationdo not functionon the basisof such diagrammaticconjuncrions,nor do they work lor anl,and evervmachinic agency.For instance,a picture or a portrait organizesno machinrcconjunction between the element of de-territorializationof the subjectreproducedin it and the materialofexpression;a portrait alwaysadds somethingto its model, as well as transforming its materials into the substances ol expression.A picture produced by a computer, lor example, wouldbe vely di{Ierent:it would correspondto a convention,quiteindependent of the 'creative' idea of the person rlho programmed it; in this case anythingadded rvould be superfluous,for the ideal ofsuch a diagram is to allowfor the Ieastpossibleinertia on the part ofthe meansofexpression,and to transmit a messagebasicallvreducedto a binary encoding.In diagrammatism.semanticor signifyingresidualsubstanceseither of the object or of themeansofexpressionare alwayssuperfluous.Semanticismor significance will be toleratedonly temporarily, and the expectationis always that they will be reducedwith the advanceoftechnologicaland scientificprogress. The concrete machines of actuai faces, scenery, etc. bring both types of redundancy into play (redundancyofrepresentationand of diagrammarism).
r56
Towards a New Vocabulary
Thel, relateto mixed sentiotics;thev activatea negotiationbetr.eendifferent semioticand materiai registers.At the levelcf the piane of consistency,that negotiarionis made possible(possibilized)b,vabstractmachineslal the level of ieal lbrces,it is orgattizedbv concretemachines.Just as otre nray sa,vof consciousnessthat it represents the impossibility ol absolute deso one can now defineabstractmachinesas indicating the territr..rrialization, impossibilit,v 0f anl. quantic. positive de-territorialization.zAbstract exist not in some transcendentreality, but only at the level of the maci-rirres of ever-pfesentpossibilitvthat rhey may appear.They representthe essence as a substance. is exist to possible impossibilitY possible, rvhose only a the Similarly, one cannot think of a substance of de-territorializaLion, or a
Concrete Machines
t57
are obliged to proceed bv way of these non-abstract machines that are hierarchized in such a way as to make some kinds of becoming depend on others,particularly the machinesof invisiblebecomingof Oedipal guilt, and of I'emalebecoming in relation !o rhe sexedbody. How does rhis hierarchization of the concrete machines become apparent? Both by the conjunction of machinic propositionsat a molecular level, and that of the capture and interlinking of extremelyvaried lines of escapeat a molar level. Concrete machinesdo not in fact belong specificallvto the molar or rhe molecular order,an1'morethan do abstractmachines,preciselybecausethey represent the possibil.ity olarticulating the two. A concretemachinedoesnot belongto a particular stratum, but indicatespossiblepoliticsof inter-stratification.Ir presentsa practical 'either-or': either an acrion will close in and become dualisnrbetween being and becoming the field in impossibilin'. the stratified,or it will openout onto diagrammaticlinesof escape.The concrete Facialitvas a concretemachinedemonstrates independentof the lormalism of contents. machineopensup the possible,eitherin the form ofsignifyingcircles,centred of representation,of anv becorning perhapson the features of faciality, or in the form of post-signif,vingspirals Contents are nothing apart from power formations. apart lrom the diaThe features that let the lines ofescapego offat a rangent,In the first case,the concrete grammatic operatorsthat function in particular stratifications. machinedevelopsheavy,figurativeterritorialities,operatingon at leasrtwo that cornposea lace presenta real micro-authorit\'.One might evensay that dimensions;in the second,it dispersesa de-terrirorializedline in particlein capiralistsvstems,basedon signifling stratificarionsand stratificationsof' signsthat tend to eludethe dimensionsof time and spacealtogether.Consider no authoritv coLrldbe establishedrvithout thesemachinesof sub.jectivatiop. 'faciality'. A ctrpitalistdoes not have power in a general sort of wav: he the practiceof transcendentalmeditation now so lashionablein the United States:we mav find it developinginro an organlessbody openingdesireout controlsa speci6cterritory, a specificfactory,in a particularcountry, and in onto an a-signif.ving outsideworld, or, equally, closingin upon a signifying each one he dependson a certainnumber ofthose transformersofsignifica' activitythat alienatesindividualsin line with the valuesof authority, In most tion - concretemachines.3In each of thesesituations,the dominant facial casestranscendentalmeditarorsare doing both things at once. (It is worth features- thoseofthe mother,lather, teacher,cop,judge,pop-star'boss,etc. 'archaic' concrete * determine the possible sun'ilal of the other, more noting in passing that the signifying text of a ritual does not necessariiy requirethe existenceof a written text like the Buddhist scriptures;it can.just machirres:the being of animals, scenery,etc. which are connectedwith the as rvell be a 'spatializedtext', like that of the Japanesetea ceremony.)In territorializedforcesofaction belongingto childhood,the coundeep-seated concrete authority these Establishing Hitler'slascism,for instance,at a mcllarlevel,therewereconcretemachinestryside,primitive societiesand so on. militarv,police,aesthetic,erc.- managingthe conjuncrionof a longstanding, machinesis the only meanswhereby a capitalisticsystemcan tolerale,and indeedan archaic,stratifiedauthoritv with abstractmachinesthat were stili tuql t() its own advantage,the linesofescapeinherentin the deyelopmentof 'feeling their way' along highly de-territorializedpaths: thus such modern productive {brcesand the de-territorializationof production relations.Its power as icon avouldbe nothing without the diagrammaticpotencyof those themesas State capitalismand sciencecame paradoxicatlyto be associated with completelyregressiveideaslike'rapaciousJewsraking over the world,, le-territorializingconcretemachines. 'purity of blood' and so on. Similarl,v,we can see rhe conjunctionberween Concretemachinesdiagramrnatizethe strata;they are the point of interacbecomings Stalin,the little lather ofthe people,Ivan the Terrible, and the running ofa rion bctween abstractmachinesand the strataolpower. The various bureaucraticplanned Srate. The concreremachinesmetabolizethe conjuncof desirc- homosexualbecoming,child becoming'growth becoming,etc tionof semiotic,material and socialfluxesindependentlvof the relationships 'I'hus, as being rhe organlessbody of the not torally seriouslr" one could define corrsciousness :. ofcausalitvor genealogythat may belongto the variousstrata redundancies. abstract machincs, as opposed to the olane ofconsistency rvhich cannot be defined either as the Thingscan thus be happeningon severaldifferenrlevelsat once.One can say toralit,vofall totalities, or as the organlessbody ofthe organlessbodies. of Louis-FerdinandC6line, for insrance,that his writing had nothing to do anci neutralizing the with detecting particularly concerned must be 3. Revolurionary analysrs withlascismand everything ro do wirh it. It had nothing to do with it in that re-rerrirorializing ellects of lhe concrete rnachinesthat make people attached to hierarchies,male his rnachine of literary de-territorializarionwas par-t of a set of abstracr diminailce. individual otnership, a clinging to depcndence,etc.
! 58
-I'owirds
a New Vocabulary
nTachines,of a phvlum of literarv expressionquite unconnectedrvith the political and socialbattlesolhis own day; and it had everythingto do with it in that it u'as only becauseof a particular concatenationof identifying characteristics, especiallyracist ones,that his literary machineexistedat all (lor instance.the role of the concretemachinesoffamilialismand the u'orkers' movementin his writing) , Consequently,it is not a matter of our having to make a distinction betweengood facial featuresoperating,lor instanceras sign-points,and bad ones operatingon a more territorializediconic mode; in both kinds. one can find fascistre-territorializations Let us make a further distinction:redundanciesofrepresentationcan be micro-redundancies or macro-redundancies. In anv signifying stratum, the totality of local expressiveredundancies relatesto the macro-redundancies of the effectsof signification.A signifring stratum cannot directiy engenderlines ofescape,unlessit is on the wa)'to destruction.In the caseolsymbolic semioticsor non-signifv'ing semiotics.it is diflerent.There is not the sametype of centringor encircling.Pre-signifying symbolic semioticsare territorializedaround a multiplicitv of centres,forming a kind of semiotic segmentalizationin uhich no one of them is pre(post-signif,ving) eminent,n,hereasa-signifi,'ing semioticsescapethe systems ofterritorialization and ofbinarized linear encoding.Thus, neither subjects the lines of'escapeto a systemofcentring that would over-encodethem and turn them into outsidelines that could be projectedonto systemsofcoordinates.The line olescapeis part of the territorializeddiagrammatismor the machinic diagrammatismin just the sameway as the other elementsof the rhizome.For instance,the line of escapeof a madman in a primitive societl is part ofthe territorializedcollectivelorceofutterance.The line ofescapeofan unexpectedactivitv on the part of a particle which is our of line with the theoretical/experimental organizationis part of the developmentof science. Thus concrete machinesare establisheddirectly from the lines of escape without going bv way of the particular mediationsand over-encodings of the svstemsof signifyingsemiotics- especiall.v not the second-degree s.vstems of significadon.We can therelorecontrastconcretemachinesthat metabolize lines of escapediagrammatically with those that re-territorialize a signifving authonty. At evert'level, then, concretemachineswill be the negoriating point between the diagrammatism of the active forcesand their falling back into svstemsof analogy, significance,etc. That negotiationwill constitute the concrete politics of de-territorialization: either the formation of de-territorializationsis organizedunder the domination of a quantic, diasrammatic de-territorialization; or else it wili end in an empty reterritorialization,in the form ofan empty consciousness, a facelessness, that all the becorningsofdesire and is expressedin a transcendent, over-encodes monotheisticGod, perhaps,or the abstractLady ofcourtly love,or a system
ConcreteMachines I59 of general equivalenceof rnoney capital. The great, supposedlys)'mbolic, signification* the Signifier,Capital, the Libido, operatorsofsecond-degree etc. never exist in themselves,but operateonly in dependenceon concrete machines. Thus, it is not enough to sal that a cerlain form of deterritorializedmonotheism,of the type codifiedby St Paul and St Augustine' is to be seenin relationto the influx ofcapitalismthat appearedafter the first industrial revolutionof the twelfth centurv' One must also note the production of new significations,of new interpretati"'ecoordinalesat th€ level of the accompanyingconstellationsofcharacteristics,the things that actuaily made the system go in one direction rather than another: with the Desert Fathers,there was a risk that it would disappearaltogetherin pursuit ofthe spiritual;with other heresies,the son was territorializedat the expenseofthe father; at another time, it had to choosebetrveenseeingl\lary as mother of God or mother olhumanity; a! another, the decisionhad to be made not to venerateimagesof Christ for their own sake;and so on. It was via all sortsof 'negotiations'ofthis kind on the concretemicro-political Part olthe theological machines that there came to be defined the right to life, the possible survival of animal-becoming, child-becoming, female-becoming,body(of music,lor example) and so on. The beconring,all the intensity-becomings can never be validly deof capitalisticrePreserttation macro-redundancies scribedin termsof a singledualisticlogic- based,for instance,on the symbol of the phallus.The phallusbecamea general operatorof authority only to the 'masses'of extentthat it remaineddependenton collectionsofactual realities, events,producedby concretemachines and the samecan be said ofall the other part objectsof psychoanalysis. The reasonlor consideringconcretemachinesis that they should make it far harder lor us to try to describehistory in termsofsignifications,aboveall of significationssimilar in nature to a particular level of a major power formation.What one has to examinehere is the whole genealogicalperspective; indeed there is probably no genealogl'that can account for madness, illegalism,shutting up children and so on rvithout referenceto concrete machinesthat carne into being independentof the relationshipsof molar fbrces,concreternachinesexisting independentlyoflarge-scaiebalancesof power,olthe diachronicimplicationsof the machinicphylum in the sphereof theeconomv,of demography,of rvar machines,etc.Would it be legitimateto that one particular poetic madness,one molecuiarfolly, might have belier.'e originatedthe diseasedstrain ofcourtly love?You may objectthat this is not a vital problem,or perhapsthat the time was ripe for the thing to happen.But surelyit is at the levelofsuch individual madness,and at that levelonly, that among the various ivecan hope to discoverthe links, the inter-relationships concretemachinesthat have metabolizedthe significationsof the period, as much in termsof the literarv,the eroticand the aestheticasof the military, the
160 Towards a New Vocabulary technologicalor the architectural,To dcscribethe machinicrhizomeswould make it in-rpossible to split up homogeneousstlara ar the ntolar level. Is it reasonableto suggestthat at everv pcriod, systemsof concretemachines infiltrated the perceptivesemiotics,sensitivity,memorv and so on in such a wav as to causethe sociusto crvstallizehuman relationshipsin a particular wav? \\ihat concreremachine led the collectiveperceptionto hold thar nor merelv are all men equal - and n'omen too - but that all stagesof human developmentare equal as r.r'ell? Whence come the systemsof overall equivalenceof men, rvomen"children - an equivalencewhich, incidentally,has merely reinlorcedthe dependenceof rvomenon men, of childrenon adults,of the primitive on the civiiized,etc.?lVhat sort of molar machinehas enforced the settins-upoflibidinal equivalencesas betweenusefulwork and useless activitt,, ,',aiuein desire and value in use, value in exchangeand value in desire,and the rest?At the level of macro-redundancies, power would be nothing withr:ut the diagrammatic operarors that empry the microredundancies of their substance and make them work against deterritolializingcollnections.(To takean example:the way the emotionof love rvas puerilized in the romantic era, coincidingwith a loss of childhood ficr children themselves, as they weremassivelysweptinto schoolsand factories.) Capitalism's general interchangeabilityof values is achievedbv means of non-abstractmachines.Its homogenizingof personologica.l areashas been insepalable lrom the homogenization it has eflected in the infrapersonological arez, at the level of molecularizing the concrete machines. Indeed it is only this that has preventedits developmentfrom collapsing under the rveightofrhe contradictionsthat should- accordingto N{arx- lead it inexorably to destruction.The power of the bourgeoisieover the working classis notjust a seneralizedrelationshipbetrveentwo classes;it operates lrom the countlessmolecularpointsofauthority establishedbv thoseconcrete machines,as thev 'negotiate'rhe various modesof de-territorializationand manipulateboth molecularmultiplicitiesand massstratifications.a T'o sum up: concretemachinescoincidewith the existenceof a twofbld articulationof strata: - in the meta-srata, the lines of escapeand the abstractmachinesof the plane o1-consistencv) they realizethe possibilityinherentin quantic positive de-territorialization; - ru the inter-strara, thev stratifi, a diflerential negarive de-territorialization. 'l-he abstractmachine- or diagrammaticcondenser- draws togetherthe code, the quantic positive de-territorialization, and the flux. the differential nega.tir.e de-territorialization)arld thus in a sensemust be thought of as a. Thus concrete machines can be said to be molar in rheir strarifying aspect and molecular in their diagrammatic de-terrirorializing aspect.
ConcreteMachines
I6l
existingprior to dillerentiationsof fluxesand encodings,and to diflerentiarionsamong natural, symbolic,signifyingand a-signifyingcodes.My distinction benveen macro-redundancyand micro-redundancy,in the specific instanceolsemiotic encodings,in lact coversthat of signifl ing semioticsand svnrbolicsemiotics,but we shall go on to use it in a rnore general way, applying it to the totality ola-semiotic lormed matter; its main interest "vill then consistin the problem of whether the eflectof diagrammaticconcrete machinescan be transferredoutside the particular caseof non-signifying sernioticsto w'hichwe have up to now restrictedit. It goesrvithout safing that the loregoingconsiderationsin no senseimply any prirnacyof the molecularover the molar economyat the levelof concrete for a verv powerfulmolecular rnachines.Indeed, though it mav be necessary machine to exist (a revolutionary movenlent,sav) in order to produce a diagrammaticline of escapervithin a molar stratification,it may on the other hand be necessaryfor a vast molar concretemachineto be set up to produce rhetiniestdiagrammatice{Iect(suchas a poetry machine).Most olthe time, in any case,such 'effects'wili work in both directions:for example,the rvhole of La Borde must function as a concretemachine in order that, at a given moment,somepeculiarity,a wa1'of taking a cigaretteor of handing someone a dish, can relarero the leyelofcoljunctions eflectedbV psvchotics'modesof semiotization.Conversely,horvever,thosesame psychoticsmust be able to that it function as concretemachines to make La Borde the kind of agenctment is. To produce a concretemachine, then, can involve tremendouslorces,a kind of semiotic Pierrelatte extracting lrom territorialized ore the deterritorializedmolar substanceupon which irr turn the production of deterritoriaiizedmolecularparticlesdepends.A productive force can thus be consideredas much fi'om the viewpoint of rt'hat it specificallyproducesas lrom that of its macro-scopicorganization. There ale always two aspectsto the presentationol'a face: one turned open to a rhizomatic deploymentof semiotic towardsmrcro-redundancies, svstems,and the other towards redundanciesof representation,which is where connectionscan alwa;'s be eflected with the hierarchy of power lormations- the actual laceone seesthen becomingequivalentto the public presentationof the lace of authority. That pubiic lace is a mask, lor the true is ashamed,and must keep hiding the faceof power, in a capitalists-vstem, to produceanalogies hollowness ofits principles;it has to clothe,to represertt, lor the diaerammatism it territorializesin an arbitrarily chosensystemof classarrd caste.This contradictionaccountslor the fascinationofthe figures of rhe judge, the cop, the teacher and so on, and the mvstely of their diagrammaticcounterparts- the thief, the prostitute,the delinquent.The keyto the mysteryof the lacepresentedby capitalismand the individuationof subjectivitl,is undoubtedlythe u'av it is continuallyoscillatingbetweenthe
I62
Towards a New Vocabuiarv
revelation of an invisible binary-phallic porr,erand the uild explosionof desirein all directionsthat followsthe disruptionofthe old territorialities.It is not a questionof two 'facialities',but of two aspectsof a single concrete machinethat pushesdesirero the extremeof abolishingall'faciality'.All that is preservedof the face is the barest minimum of redundancy that will keep the svstem functioning; an artificial face is continually being reassembledby the media. But the svstem is nnder threat on all sides lrom an invisible becontng; this in itselfrepresents the final point oflascination,capturingall the energyofdesireand making it a desirefor annihilation.Whv are !he machines 'faciality'essentially of bound up with the individuatedmode of subjectivation? Whv are thev not linked to animality, or some mode of creating bodiliness?The diagrammatism of territorializedagenciestends to reconstrlrct territories,or emblems(like thoseon tee-shirts,an updatedversionof tattoos). u'hereas the production of facial features is an operation that produces de-territorialized signifying formations. The relevant elements of the presentedface are there to enabie the system to gain semiotic control of individua.ls,to connectthem with a decodedflux of u'ork. fhe {bceis never recognizedas a multiplicitv or a rerritorializedemblem, but onl;, in that it makesit possibleto universalizethe signilicationsof porver.-significationsof generalhuman equivalence.The animal totem, the tattooedbody, was not a way into a universal languagelike that of the exchangisteconomy.With 'faciaiity'. the distinctive features ofthe face and body are used to serve a specificnrodeof diagrammatismthat de-territorializes whole constellations of desiremachinesand connectsthem up with productionmachines.The lace is Par excelbnce the substanceof expressionolthe signifier.We may say here that the human profiie is like the outline of a key: what mauers is not its unique characteristics,bur the ellectivenesswith which it unlocks the code. 'faciality' Capitalist alwaysexiststo servea signifyingformulalit is the means whereby the signifier takes control, the way it organizesa certain mode of individuated subjectivation,and the collectivemadnessof a machine that createsconsciousness w'ithout any content,and ofa becoming that cannor be perceived.Consequentlvit is impossibleto think that the w,rittenword could have anv lunction at the level ofthe bodv: before there was a face,there were features of bodiliness, a s,vntaxof bodiliness; after the face, we come to an invisible becoming,a blurring, a senseof shame over the bodily elements ivl".ichare now merely tolerated as left-overs,since the essenceof the laws of Powerare basedupon the interpretableelementsof a script.
Meaning and Power'
The structuralists'ideal is to be able to capture any situation, however in mathematcompiex,in a simpleformula- a formula that can be expressed ical, axiomatic form, or handled by a computer.The modern computer can 'formulate'a picture. handleextremelycomplexproblems,for instanceit can picture The question is rvhether that is not fundamentally different lrom the imageswe perceivein the 'natural' world. The picture produced by the computerhas beenreducedto the stateof a binarv message,a lormula that can be transmittedin rhe sameway as electricitv;it has lost all the depth and u'armth,all the possibilitiesfor re-organization, of the original.It seemsto me that the leductionsof lhe structuralistsproducea similar result.What they give back to us is comparableto a kind of technocraticvision of the world; it 'essence', has lost the essenceof the background lrom which it came. By I meanail that relatesto desire.Whatever the complexityof the situationit is lookingat and of the r,vayit proposesto lbrmalizeit, structuralismassumes that it can be reducedb;' a systemof binaly notation, to w'hat is cailed in semioticsdigitalizedinlormation,which can be transferredto the keyboardof a tvpewriter or a computer'.The human sciencesthink to acquirescientific status by following rvhat was the path of the pure sciences,(As for example whenmathematicssoughtto makeitselftotallyaxiomaticby making algebra, topology,geometry,etc. all dependenton one and the same fundamental logic,a singlebasicwriting,) Linguistic analysts,by analysingall the differentsoundsand signs,have tried to produce a seriesof symbols capable of encompassingthe structure of all languages- but in fact all they end up with are the features shared by languagein general.The life of the language- what it means,and how we use it- eludessuchlormalization.In the realm ofpsychiatry,too,peoplehavefora long tinre beenproposingthe use ofscientificdescriptions,systematictables of symptoms and syndromes,but what happensin real life never quite fits in with this sort of classification.There are too many borderline situations:one can never say for certain whether one is dealing with a hysteric with certain paranoid featureswho behavesnot unlike a schizophrenic,though there is an r, A talk given at the Douglas Hospital, Montreal, first published in the ret'iewBriches,Montrcal, r976.
r64
Towarclsa New Vocabularl'
It is one thing to analvsea elementof the deplr'ssive;and so on, ad inJinitum. structure;it is a very diflerent matter to put fcrrwarda structuralistphilosophy, a structuralistinterpretationthat can accountevenlor the movementof of desire. objects,lor pcrverrelationships,politicalsituationsand in','estments Obr.'ious,one would sa)'; yet it is preciselv this that Freudians do, and lrequently fuIarxiststoo, rvhen they talk ofunconsciousstructuresor econ'fhev rvould have us beljeve that the,vhave found the omic structures. definitii.eatomic lormula, and that hencelorthall the;-needd,-ris to intervene with an ir-rterpre tation or a word olcommand basedupon that structure,that ibrmula. This rvould sive them considerablepower and importance.I think our answermust be that their structuresexist not within things,but alongside them. The structurai approachis one praxis among others,but perhapsnot the most lruitful or the most e{Iective. It is:r questionof re-dellningthe problem of meaningarrd sigr-rification not as somethineirnposedb.vheavenor the ttatureof things,but as resultinq iiorl tire conjunctionof serniotics)'stemsin confiontation.Without suclt a r:onjunctionthele can be no meaning.One tvpe olmeaning is produced bv tfresemioticsof the body, anothet"bythe semioticsof pou'er (olr'vhichthere .rre lnarry), .vetanother bv machinic semiotics- rvhich are those that Llse ol' signs that are neither symbolic, nor of the order of the signifvings,vstems pow,er.All these diflerent sorts of meaning are continuallv intertrr'ining u ' i t h o u t i t s e v e r b e i n g p o s s i b l et o s a ) ' t h a t t h e v t ' e p r e s e nut n i v e r s a sl i g n i f i cations. One n.ra;'savthat there are two types olpolitical conceptionsrelating to desire. On the one hand, formalist reasoningseeksclues lrom which to gain accessto its interpretation,to a hermeneutic;on the other,an apparentlv mad reasoningstarts liom the notion that universalityis to be found in the 'dilection ofsingularity, and that singularitl'can becomethe authenticbasis for a political and micro-politicaiorganizationthat is lar more rational than rvhat rvehave at the moment. Let us takeas our startingpoint the exampleof tbe patientCarlo Sterlinhas r o l d u s a b o u t .T h l e c m o r r t h sb e f o r eh e r b i r t h . t l r e l ew a sp r e g n a n L )r ' o m i t i n g b',vthc mother;at six nionths,shedevelopedfood allergv;at three,w'idespread eczema;at six, problernsat school;at i\!'ent\',attacksof anxietl'; at thirty, non-specificvaginitis; at forty, she attempted suicide more tharl once. Diilerent semiotic conrponents\t,ould seemto have beenat \4'orkat eachstage of this clinical history. In the caseof the mother'svomiting, tl'redisturbance rvasexpressednot bv a localizedsubject,but u'aspassedlrom one personto itnother- like the old saving that when the parentsdrink the children get druuk. I should sa1,that this is a caseof a semioticorganizationtaking over ll"orn a symboiic functioning. Such svnrbolic senrioticsdo not involr.e a distinguishablespeakerand hearer.Words do not play a major part, sincethe
Meaning and Power I65 messageis carriednot via linguisticchains,but via bodies,sounds,mimicr,n-, postureand so on, Food allergy at six months. I cannot define the diiference between the semioticelementsinvolvedin this allergyand thoseinvolvedin the mother's vomiting, but one thing seemsclear: in lhe caseof the allergy they becomefar more important. From birth, noises,sensationsof heat and cold, of light, of contact,of one lace respondingto another, have begun to lolm the child's world. It remainsto be seenrvhy that new rvorldshould stay attachedto her skin- is it that she is refusingto enter it, or ro haveanything to do with it? At six vears old, school problems. These obviously relate to the use of Ianguagein someway - notjust languagein general,but the languageofthe teacher,oladult power. lvlany people's luture fate is sealedin primary school. There is no need to administer an IQ test to predict in advancethat some chiidrenwill nevergo to university.The schoolmachinemakr:sits implacable selection.We are now in the realm of signifyingsemiotics,for with school,the child becomessubjectto sociallaws that did not touch upon such things as vomiting and eczema.One could not reasonablypunish a child lor having eczema- bu! no one thinks it wrong to punish her for being unableto get her sumsright. A seriesof micro-socialpowerstakesshape- lamily, school,local authority- eventuallythe Statepower.Any therapistwho took no interestin the child's everydavlife, at home and in outsiderelationships,and concentratedoniy on pure structures,pure signilyingchains,complexes,supposedly unir.'ersal phasesof development,would be simply refusingto seethe essence ofwhat was happeningat the levelofreality and ofthe economyoldesire. At twentv, attacks of anxiety. These could be schizophrenicsyndromes that manifest themselvesonly at a certain point in one's life. Somepsychoanalystsnowadays claim to have found schizophrenicsat the age ofthree or four.I do not seehow anyonecan makesuch a diagnosisbeforepuberty.The semioticfactors in puberty (new impressions,anxiety towards the unknown, socialrepressionand so on) are enormously a{Iectedby such syndromes,and analysisshould therefore be directed to considering the power formations thatcorrespondto them: the high school,technicalschool,sportsclub, leisure arrangements,etc. At this point a whole new facet of societythreatensto clampdown upon the desireof the adolescent,cutting her offfrom the world and leading her to turn in upon herself. At thirty, non-specificvaginitis.Once again,the levelhaschanged,and it is undoubtedly marital problems that are in the forefront. At forty, attempted suicide.This involvesher in the whole apparatusof medicalpower, police power, religious power. This is a very summarysurveyof the main directionsan analvsismust take: theunchartedconrinentofpower lormations,in other rvordsthe unconscious of the socius itself rather than the unconscious buried in the lolds of the
I66
Tou'ards a New Vocabularr,'
individual's brair-r,or expressedin stereotypedcomplexes.The analyst cannot bc neutral towards thosepower formations.For ir-istance, he cannot rest content with acting as a specialistdiscoverinsthe allergiesthat cause eczema. It is the whole attitude of specialiststhat needsquestioning,rhe whole politics of interpretationbasedon prefabr-icated codings.To analvse specific eJementswhen dealing with an essentialmicro-politicalproblem (which bi, definitioncuts acrossa number of quite dillerentareas)is notjust a matter of form: it involves,first and foremost,the practiceof what I should defineas a rriicro-pc-,litics relating both to the object of study or rherapt.,and to the desireofthose rvho conductthe analvsis. T h e s t r u c t u r a l i s t sf o' r m a l i s mi s r e d u c t i o n i si tn n a t u r ew h e ni t c o m e st o t h e relationship it establishesbetr.veen what it calls profound structures and manifest srlrcrures- Particularlv so in the case of the linguistic double articulation.rr,hichconsistson the one hand ofa systerrrolsigns that haveno rneaning as such (phortemes,graphemes,symbols), and on the other, ol chainsof discoursethat convey meaning (monemes,etc.). It seemsthat lor them the formal level takes control of the significations,in some w.ay engenderins or producingthem. Br-rtsignificationsdo not comelrom heaven, n o r d o t h e v a r i s es p o n t a n e o u s lovu t o f a s t ' n t a c t i c aol r s e m a n t i cw o m b .T h e y are inseparablelronr the power forrlarions that generatethem in shifting relationshipsof pon'er.There is nothing universalor.automaticabout them. In an attempt to clarilv the statLrs of the variousencodingsystems,rvhether or not the),'passbi, wav of siensin the sensedefinedby studentsof semiotics and linsuistics.I suggesta seriesofdistinctionsrvhoseenrireaim is to identify the practical lunctioning of u'hat I rvould call sign machines. In realitv, however,one is alwaysdealingwith an interwear.'ing of severalsuch systems, with a mixture olsemiotics.I believefirst of all that one must be carefulnot to confusenatural encodinesrvith semioticencodings. This first distinction should preventour accepringthe somervhatmagical resemblances that stmcturaliststend to seebetweenlanguageand ,nature,, which rest ultimatelv on the notion that one could gain control over things and sociervsimply bl' gaining conrrol of the signs thev set in morion (like ploing back to the ancient madnessof witches and cabbalists,with their statuesancl Golems). C)f coursethere is a spherewhere signs have a direct effbct on things - in the genuine experimental sciences,which use both material technologyand a complexmanipulationof sign machines. But what I shouldlike first ro do is to referagain to the distinctionproposed bv Hjelmslrv between the material of expressionand the substanceof' expressiorr. It is the conjunctior-r of diflerentmaterialsof expressionthat has changedthe pragmaticbearingof the message.Is eczema lormed scientifically or semiologically? Does non-specificreactiv€r'aginitis,at particularstages of its development,have as its major componentthe signifyingsemioticsol
Meaning and Power I67 the social environment,or the interventionof an a-semioticencodingthat dependson viruses,bacteria,etc,?How much relatesto socialsituations,to relationshipsof power, language, money, kinship? To suggest that the signifier is everywhere (and that consequentlyinterpretation and transferenceare effectiveevervwhere)is to miss the lact that eachofthese encoding components(whether semioticor not) can gain polverover the situationsand objects conlronting us. On the contrary, I believethat one should not be dogmaticabout which mode of accesshas priority. Such priority can emerge only lrom analysingeachparticular situation. \{e thus already have our first distinction between sign machines that function by constituting an autonomous semioiogicalsubstance- a language - and those that function directly as a 'natural' encoding,independentof language.Perhapsit would be more correcthereto talk ofsignalsrather than signs.The differencebetweena signal, a hormonal signal lor examPle,and a linguistic sign lies in the lact that the former produces no signification, engendersno stable s,vstemof redundancythat would make it possiblelor anyoneto seeit as identicalto any representation. We then cometo a seconddistinction.The signifyingsystemis punctuated and by the objectsto which it refers;Iinguiststell by signifiedrepresentations us that the relation between signifier and signified is an arbitrary one. \evertheless,thereare t1'pesofsigns that sustaina relationshipofanalogyor correspondencebetween themselvesand the representationsthev signify: theseare calledicon signs.An exampleof theseis the symbolson road signs, rvhich do not involve the operation of a linguistic machine. Experts in linguisticsand semioticshave gradually come to consider that icons, or diagrams,or any other pre-verbalmeansofexpression (gestural,etc.) are dependentupon the signify'inglanguageand are only imperfect meansof communication. I believe that this is an intellectualistassumption that becomesextremelyshakywhen appliedto chiidren,the mad, the primitive or any of those rvho expressthemselvesin a semiotic register that I would classifvas a symbolic semiology. Symbolicsemiologiesinclude dance,mime, somatizationof feelings(having a nervousbreakdown,bursting into tears),all meansofexpressionthat form. A crving child, take an immediate,and immediatelycomprehensible, whatever its nationality, is making it clear that it is unhappy without the benefitof a dictionary. It has been suggestedthat such symbolic semiotics should be seenas dependingon linguisticsemiotics,on the ground that one can only decipher,understandand translatethem by using language.But what does that prove?Just becausewe use an aeroplane to travel lrom Americato Europe,we do not say that thesetwo continentsare dependenton aviation. AII sorts of peopleshave survived- and some still do - rvithout signifying semiotics, and in particular ,,r'ithout a written language. Their
I68
'Iowards
a New VocabularY
Meaning and Power r69
are responsiblefor your own actions.There are all sortsofthings you can do, starting with fucking up yourself and everything around you . . .' Signification is alwaysan encounterbetweenthe lormalizationofsystemsof values, ofinterchangeabilitvand ofrules ofconduct, bv a particularsocietvand an machine which in itself has no meaning - which is, let us say, expressior-r a-signil,ving-that automaticallyproducesthe behaviour,the interpretations, ,,vantedb.vthe system. the responses The system of double articulation, introduced by lvlartinet, masks the rel'erencetosignifyingsemiologiesExperts,technocratsofthemind'repreprofounddisparitybetweenthe lormalizationoperatingat the levelof content sentativesol'themedicaloracacle'nicestablishmentsrr'illnotlistentosuch and that operatingat the leveI of form. At the latter (which lvlartinetcallsthe ofs-vstenr entire has worked out an ior*. of expression.Psychoanai.vsis level of of the second articulation), the sounds, the systemsof distinctive range same to the whatever it can relateeVervthing interpretation',r'hereb)' so oppositions or the a-signifving figures of Hjelmslev, form an extremely and order it svmbolizes phallus, is a tree a pine universalrepresentations: eflectivemachine, what I u'ould call a diagrammatic machine,that seizes take controL experts these itlterchangeabilitv of systems such on. By imposing upon all the creative operationsof languageand imprisons them in one and others to try to of the symboliJsemiologiesused by children, the mad ing particular syntax.At what he cal.lsthe levelof the first articulation,of written signif the But can' they as best sal'eguardthelr econom'vol desire u'ords,sentences, semanticand pragmaticinterpretations,there takesplace them: it tells be: them leave not will establishment .e*iology of the ruling is conjunction, the re-centringand the hierarchizationof all power formathe thiit 'Tftis isleally what vou wanted to sav You don't believeme' but The my to a specilictypeofequivalences and ofsignifications. tions so as organize adjusting on go I'll probablv becuuseI am explessingmyself badlv' 'structuralize' power systematize linguistic machine is there to or those all vour that principle the accePt to actuali.v int.rpr.t^tion until I can g.i "ou lormations; it is basically a tooi lor the use of the law, morality, capital, symbolicexpressionsareuniversallytranslatable.,Forthepsychoanalvst,it of religion,etc. From the first,words and phrasesget their meaningonlyby wav all expressions. has now becomea crucrallf important questionof power: ofa particular syntax, a rhetoric that is territorialized upon eachofthese local interpretattve same t\e ol control desire must be made to come ullder the to power formations.But only the use of a more generallanguagethat oversubmit kinds all of individuals deviant language,This is his way o|making encodesall theselocal languagesand dialectsmakesit possiblefor a social specializes pslchoa'alyst the that is this it and pow.er, ruling of the tt.,e-io\^/. and economicstatemachineto seizepower at a more totalitarianlevel.It is to in. the extent that the two kinds of lormalization(that of the linguisticmachine l.hisbringsuStotheproblenro|therelationbetweensignificationand In as an a-signifyingmachine,and that of power formationsas the producersof significations impose and produce porver of power. All stratifications signifiedcontent)becomeinteriinkedvia a signifyinglanguagethat we get a escapethis rvorld of the ..rtui,t exceptional.ircr-rtuntut peoplemanageto after meaningful world - that is to say a realm of significationin harmony with the consciousness dominant signification- lor instance,a Personrecovering ofjolts' social, economicand moral coordinatesof the ruling power. series in a then' but is' he t'here therapy wonders electro-convulsive Structuralists,especiallyAmerican structuralists,are not interestedin crossesbackor.er.thett-,,.,t.'otaofsigrrifications'Heremembershisname.arrd socialorigins underlying the lormalizationof significations,and claim that of significationof the graduaiiy fits back into place all the different asPects they arise lrom profound semiotic structures. It is hard to say rvhere thev world. of think the meaning comesfrom - it seemsto have landed out of the blue. Let this threshold cross to attempr an in Peopleresort to aicohol or drugs this me say again that meaning never comes from language as such, from But what exactly is dominant significatronsin the op-positedirection proloundsymbolicstructuresor the mathematicsof the unconscious.Meanredundancl' of systenls threshold, tf,is crossing point of all the various when ing is deternrinedby very real socialpower formationsthat can be identified morning every on we Put encodingand signsof al'isorts?What is it that threshold by anyone who caresto take the trouble to do so. SupposeI come into the That so on? and nationalitv we get up identity. sex, profession, expression room wearing a long gown: in itselfit meansnothing, but if I am doing it to ofsymbolic components various the of re-centring consistso1'the ofdesire shon'thatI am a transvestiteit doesmeansomething.Ifeveryoneelsepresent sounds,bodies;,ofeverythingin the economy(the world oi'gestures, 'come on now, pull yorrrself is also a transvestite,there is no problem; but if, say, a conferenceofclergy its own. that is threatening to break out on wearing cassocksis taking place, then it r,r'iilhave quite a diflerent meaning. this particularjob' You toqether.There you are, in this particular marriage'
systemo|expression(inwhichwordsareindirectinteractionlvithother hascertainlynot beenany forms ofexprlssion- ritual, gestural,musical,etc') peoplesresistedthe ,h. poor". lor that. it is aiguable, in fact, .that some of somelorms intrusion the resisted comingol a wrltten language*(juttut thev rvou.Id system asignifying such that feared of technologr')becausetiey Children and the desire' of mocle and lile of rvay traditional destroy their most to them without *.n,uily ill often express rhe things that matter
r7a
Towards a New Vocabularv
Meaning and Power 'He's
not too In a rnental hospital,it could be interpreteddifferently'again: u,ell today - wearing a dressagain.' In other words for a man to wear a skirt r n e a n so n e t h i n g i f h e i s a . j u d g eo r a p r i e s t ,a n o t l r e ri f h e i s a l u n a t i c ,i e t another if he is a transvestite.Significationis alrvavsinseparablelrom the por.verposition.Supposeyou were to bring your shit to someoneon a dish: atrddisgusting,buI to a therapistit ordinarv peopleu'ould find it meaningless which could be a goodsign.It would representa gift, or an important message would unfortunatelytend to adapt to fit his o*'n systemof the psvchoa.nal,vst interpretations('He's trving to explain his transference , I atrt his mother, he i s r e g r e s s i n g. . ' , e t c . ) . In modern societies(be they capitalist or bureaucratic socialist), all are centredupon the educatingof the rvorklorce. This is svmbc'licsenriologies a processthat startsin irrlancy:\4,esetoulselvesver;'earlyon to do battlelvith the child's own logic and methodsof semiotization.The child is continuallv startingwith s-vsterns) being drivcn frorn side to side bv contradictorvpo\ryer his or.'npowerover himself,his gifts,his own leelings,his u ish to run, his rvish to draw - all of'which are in contradictionwith his wish to becomean adult. On top ofall this there are the constraintsthat burden the porverrelationsof tiretarrily and indirectlv burden him too. Tl-rereis a wholemazeof contradictory powersthrough which the child must thread his waf in order to develop his owr-rsemioticcomponentsofdesire,to disciplinethem, to bendthem to the direction clecleedby the signifiing semiologiesof the donrinant porver- in other u,ords, to castrate them. Sometimesthe entire s)'stemshatters,and thereis conlusion,panic. neurosis.the vis.itto the psvchiatristand all the rest. The third distinction I have suggestedis between signifving and asrgnilving semiotics.Following Charles SandersPeirce,semioticianshave concluded that the systernof images (icons) and the svstem of diagrams should be brought togetherunder a singleheading,sincefor them a diagram at oncemore and is no more than a simplifiedimage. But an imagerepresents less than a diaqram: ar-rimage reproducesa great many aspectsthat a diagram doesnot include in its lepresentation,while a diagramincludes- lar more preciselyand efficientl;'than an image - the articulationsrvherebya s-vstemoperates.In my vier.v,there{bre,one must separatethe two, placirlg the image alongside symbolic semiotics,and making diagrammatism a semiotic categorv on its own, a category/of a-signifvingsemiotics- u hich is ol' the utmost importance becauseit is rvhat we seeat work in the world of the sciences,ol music, of the econom,vand elsewhere.A-signifving,or diagrammatic. semioticsproduce not redundanciesof signification.but machinic redundancies(theseare rvhat linguistsrefer to when thev talk ofrelational significations).To explain what he means by a diagram, Peircegives the example of a temperaturecurve, or) at a more complex level, a systemof algebraicequations.The signsfunction in placeofthe objectsthey relateto,
t'Jr
independentlyof any e{Iectsof significationthat may exist alongsidethem. This is as though the ideal would be for diagrammaticsign machinesto lose all their naturai inertia, to give up all the manilold valuesthat car)exist in symbolicsvstemsor signifyingsystenrs:the sign becomesso refinedthat there areno longerthirty-sixpossibleinterpretations,but a singledesignationwith an extremell' preciseand rigid s,vntax.In physics,for instance,one can alwayscreatefor oneselfone s o\{'n representationof atoms or particles,but sucha representationwould not figurein scientificsemiotization. Non-signifyingsemioticscan bring into play systemsof signsthat, though they may incidentally have a slmbolic or a signif,vingeffect, have no connectionwith that symbolism or significationas lar as rheir specific functioningis concerned.Symbolicsemiotics,like signifvingsemiotics,derive their e{Iectivenesslrom their dependenc€on a particu.lar a-signilying machine. It should be made clear that non-signifyingsign machinesin every spheretend to elude the territorialiriesofthe body, ofspace,o[rhe porverof rociety, and the complexusofsignificarionsthat they conrain.They arein lact the most de-territorializedof all. For example:a child wakes up and complainsof leeline ill, w,hereupon his mother concludesthat he doesnot want ro go to school.Then, changingkey, she decidesto cail the doctor- who alone canactuallysay,'Your child is not to go to school.'Shehasshiftedfirst lrom a svmbolicserniologvoperatingat the levelof the child's body to a signif,ving semioiogyat the levelof familial power,and then on to a lurther levelwherea porr'ermachinestepsin u'ith lormidablesocialand technicaleilectiveness. At eachof theseshifts,one territoriality has been abandonedfor another that offers greater scope for non-signifying sign machines. A diagrammatic machine , the presumedscienceof the doctor, dissolvesthe diagrammatic machineofthe pou'erofthe school,rvhich has alreadl'partly ovelriddenthe powerof the family. The rvhole labric of the capitalist world consistsof this kind of flux ol de-territorialized signs- money and economicsigns,signsof prestigeand so on.Significations,socialvalues(thoseone can interpret,that is) can be seen at the level of power lormations,but, essentially,capitalismdependsupon non-signilvingmachines.There is, for instance,no meaning in the ups and downsof the stock market; capitalistpower,at the economiclevel,produces nospecialdiscourseofils orvn,but simply seeksto control the non-signifying semioticmachines, to manipulate the non-signifyingcogs of the system. Capitalismgiveseachof us our particularrole - doctor,child, teacher,man, woman,homosexual- and it is up to us to adapt ourselvesto the systemof arrangedlbr eachofus. But at the levelofreal power,it.is never signification thistype of role that is at issue;power doesnor have to be identifiedwith the directoror the minister- it operatesin relationshipsoffinanceand lorce,and amongdi{Ierent pressuregroups. A-signifiing machinesdo not recognize
172 Tou'ards a New Vocabulary i r g e n t s , i n d i v i d u a l s , r o l e s o r e v e n c l e a r l y d e f i n e d o b j e ctthsi.sBvle r l ' l a c t t h e v acquirea kinclof omnipotence,moving acrossthe significationsystemsrvithin r.hich individr,ralagentsrecognizeand becomealienatedliom one another. Capitalism has no visiblebeginningor end. There is no moment when we are not encircledby powerformations.In our societiespeople must not gesticulateovermuch;we must each sta1,in our on the dotted line, recognizethe signalswe are gi"'en- and proper place,sigr-r any lailure mav iand us up in prisonor hospital.Ratherthan Iookingupon the insidehis ou'n bodv and needsto scirizophrenicas someonervho is paraly'sed be lookedatter, it might be better to r)' to see(rather than interpret) how he Iunctions in the social situation he has to contend with, and rvhat are the diaerammaticproblemshe is facing us with. It is not a matter of transr.ersal, ap.ingschizophrenics,playing at catatonics.but of discoveringhorv a mad person, a child, a homosexual.a prostitute, etc, shifts the componentsof 'normal', take care to let well desireabout in tire socialarena while we, the alone. What doesit rlatter to us whether dramas of a symbolic (pre-significant) order or a post-significantorder are being acted out in the body ofa i u n a t i c ,a c h r l do r a n v o n ee l s e ?I s i t o u r j o b t o ' a d j u s t 's u c hp e o p l es ot h a t t h e ) {lt into the rvorld, to 'treat' deviance?What do we mean when rve talk of treating a schizophrenic?One wonders whether it is more a matter of his being there to challengeus rhan of our being there to look after him. When I t a l k a b o u t ' u s ' , I d o n o t j u s t m e a n u s a s i n d i v i d u a l s( t h o u g h ,i n l a c t , i f ; - o u have a discussionwith a schizophrenicsoon after a familv quarrel, you find vourselfstartinsto think on quite differentlines- a therapeuticexperience), b r - r t ' u s ' a st h e \ ^ / h o l es o c i a lc o n t e x t .T h e s c h i z o p h r e n ri cs f l o u n d e r i n gi n a world in rvhich relationshipsof signs. or productions of signification,far and neuroses. outstrip our individual madnesses
Politics and Desire
Causality, Subjectivity and History'
r. History and the Signifying Determination i{isconceptionsabout the subjectivityofhistory arisefrom the fact that one tendsw,ithoutnoticing it to posethe problem of a subject- whetherto afhrm or deny that there is one - as the subjectthat producesutteranceofdiscourse and actionsrelatingto history,rather than envisagingit simply as the subject of utterancesas we receivethem. That there is a subjectof history is not in dispute;ir is the subjectrhat is constitutedby, and remains the prisonerof, The repetitivestructures,signifyingchainswound back around thernseives. u'orking class,for example,as alienatedsubjectivity,becomesthe classof classwords - in other words the classofutterances,producing,in a givenarea 'class', and 'class o{' historic utterance, significationslor such terms as the struggle'- rvhereasit should bear within it the historic destiny of abolishing divisionofsocietyinto classes.Indeed,in a certain time and place,thereis a specialwaf in which the word is spoken,a reinforcementof the stress,so that theword itselltakes on a particular class.In the u'orkers'movementthe u,ord 'class' used currently as an abbreviationfor'working class'is pronounced quite diflerentlylrom, say,a classat school. Every mode olthought thus has its own initiatory codeof metonyms,with particularmeaningsgiven to'Party', 'the OId Man', or even'44'.'We might takeas a starting point somethingLacan said in his first Seminarof l965-6: 'One need only say in passingthat, in psychoanalysis, history is a diflerent dimensionlrom that oldevelopment,and that it is a mistaketo try to identily r . S e c t i o n st , r a n d 3 a l l s u m m a r i z el e c t u r e su i t h t h e d i s c u s s i o nt h a t l o l l o w e de a c ho n e .T h e f i r s t r h o w c r e g i v e n t o r h e ' T h e o r . vC o m m i t t e e ' o f r h e F G E R I ( F e d e r a t i o no f I n s t i t u t i o n a lS t u d y a n d ResearchGroups). In October t965, some dozen groups, working along the lines ofinstitutional a n a l y s i s ,l e d e r a t e d w i t h i n t h e F G E R I : t h e y c o n s i s t e do f a b o u t t h r e e h u n d r e d p s y c h i a t r i s t s , psychoanalysts, psychologists, nurses, academics, teachers, urban studies people, architects, economists,members ofcooperatives,film-makers and so on. T h e C E R F I ( C e n t r e f o rl n s t i t u t i o n aSl t u d y ,R e s e a r c h a n d T r a i n i n g ) , a m e m b e r oh fe F G E R I . the CERFI aiso commissions publishes the revieu' Recherches, and a series of Cahiersde reclvrchesi various public and private bodies to produce specializedstudies (on plant, cooperation, health, e d u c a r i o na n d s o o n ) , z . T h c ' O l d l t l a n ' c o u l d a p p l v e q u a l ) yt o L e n i n , S t a l i no r T r o r s k r , i 4 4r u e L e P e l e t i e r i nP a r i si s t h e h e a d q u a r t res o f t h e C o m m u n i s t P a r t y C e n t r a l C o m m i t t e e .
y
;sfiFE i€FEgi 3gE 3ffggii iji iii Fiii€ i€ig€i Ei€ii iiiiiiiiiiiisgiiiiff i iii€tuisiiii€ii giiii slsgii iigiiifiililiii iiigigi€i;ii*;g j 3i E **il€ fE Fiigii, iiiiFigiiiigi€iiE E yb:
I?zi s iiiiiriiil iliiitiiii liiiliiiiiiii ri
iiiisiii*iiiiiiiiig;ggiiiiigi
li€* 3g1iii'iaii€,{ifftsl i i;iiAiil| r?iiiiiii Iiii iililiiitlilliiiiliiiiiilii gi is iil sI ili iiaglil siiiii; i3E iiiiii iiiiifi
gtriiiiiifE iiIiisii iiiiiig fui Iiiiiiiigiiii
F E E :H :E ' E € ; ; E ; q F i r t a€r$s"i f ;T;rrl=:*#€EE;= E i ; $ 1 € *ETi 4 r t 8 ; i : i i H , iI : . { e - s 5 €E i r i * " t ; ' AE;i;;S;t;i"aErigE
3 i;;i+iE€E;fi?ii* E;;Eist;t3lF!E;:g Z rtE3I:E:g€E! I i T' l t fEi E I ; iE i a aI a i t i iE:! E',5t.6; ! Fe 3 E-a'a ;sEKilE:*Fg{EiEHs
a , i + 1 5s!: ;s* 3: ti! :i&g€=I i: c+
s:;; $;: F t s i; :f *i e ; : i ; :i€
; s ? *l i:? i E ;l l E ; : : gi63;EyI ;* ;FA:E EE
@
= €
i ah
(u
o
r! rd
o
a
a (lJ
a
ijiiiiiiiiiiiliEiiiiiIi ;i'iiii
uet:81 g;$ciif Fi€iiiii fiiiiiii,iiiiiEaiEi iiiiF;lgli iigisiifsigiiigiiiii iggii
aiiiiiiliiiiiiiiisiiiiii:itsiiisi iI
tr
-s
a (J o cl
tr o
(|{ a I
I
o A o lr I
€J
:
t F
: ; i i €E Ei r ' ; ; i i i u ei :isesst :;$
iisiiiiiigill iiiiii,l iiiiiiig sigiiig
si3$r isiiiiiiii iiiiiisi{il iii; i E' +Ei€ iii3;iilci€ii}iiiiliiiia
9 r orl'j
I f E ; E E Eg i € $ : ; t : O
s E E t E j gf i H s s e r . *5 i
O
.
>
l .q
q
(
(
o
;;€E ;igi Fg;iFi?f€iiigE;
3 isEE-.i E$E#F[$i
' 8 9
€ i,r: E :P ; f , : i t €E ;
Q
L
o
d
L
d
L
a
d
ad d
9 , =
EI{3:r*E+1,;frs€E
I
- o aI 0
- +
bDj
? Esi:t?:E;E;Y=.tt
i ili i ; tiiiligf;giff Ei € e ; i u E ; ; s f g;; F g gi €giils: liigilfi fi* f fif;i iifiigiii F; *gi;i;€ : *t :t € a;,g;c i !i r s$j iigf iggiEs ru:tiisr; iiE ! ii iiiii iiI lis€ E*ii??iii iliiiilla illiiliiigaaili;'i''
i?ifiiisiigiiisislliiiiiii:ii ,,s; ri F
igiijjiifii;$fii*i;sB;s iiigrg g ggg s;iF;r iig;iiigi ;iigiiifsiiigsg
i aiiiiiiiiiiliiii,iiiilliisllli*iiii
gI iI i ifi r{ ii fgE € i iiiiilgiii iliff isr iiiiiii gigg i* ii*gii iiii i* ;ii iiiiiiii igsf ffiis ss E
=
'5 -
!
:
.
;
i d
Q
3';
P E . ET 9
-.-
i o ^ . c
. :
e
. o
=
?,v E \ fr
A g E F € r U a"r o 354'; i i
-
eY{€ P
5
. a =
a
.!
a -a a a o R a d
E 3i-
a y-7 * ir* E 2\ E L
=f
! Fr E3
; E ; . ! i
= = - i ; E
;t$b; p€lE:
S s - EI s I-tte 6
u
4
b d
* i
E
. E
h
E
:
<
E !
o - h
-
$
= : i - . F 9 o E t ! g : E b a . ;
d E i I i r f , -l - E EEi = e : + t eE
-; rt -- +*=E; ;- H : ,ia
EEJ€:.I r = T * - l f3
.lri:
r i €
a
.i E rE - x E F i E ; :
i :;ri?
a ! ' A c -
E i s r.; : :.;i; E I F , !t s
o
iff;;f;$fggfffifigfffgg5 fgg g jg gfg$g;ifg;sie rugFff; fffiiFf 'i';fffggsg gggif ggggfi lffggugg gigffgggfg ig*ggjsggi igi rufffff s
tr g
3
o
E
bo
gi; giis g' f ;if E E € ' ia;gii figiii iii itifiiii;iiiii EEi?iiiaiIiii s -! E i;' gl i i aiEi; [i?iiE}i ii! i ax; i; Fa iE !ibiiliu T r€ iE ! iE; rE i !?EE Itiii;ii:iEl ?iiiiliiEii
ia; !lilis€ ig, !lit;i!i:iTl*11,2;i
1!ZZr:!i,gEEj:rii'rg;iii*Za*s
d
3 o{)
I O
d
e
q
O
o
d d 0
6
bD
6 - ' E * E
^
u 1
r
:
a
t 9
5
6 o
L > -
r
( ,
-'r
L O
d
a
: + r : ;g ; 5 ;gt* ; l€ s t # rE; 3 ; i ? 3;EE I i e
E E . . - 33 6 I e
I
O
$ ; ' ; ; T F F9 J F i e a i ! ; t o3,.' ii8
v
J
t
€iE:g;Ir : : ; ; #E; ; P
a
z,
O
d
N
@
s 3 i i FFi : o o r E r A s . E X oE; - E
O
o
* 5 * i ; ! € ^s:
F * . : : eT : o ( *9,=:EE:i E:;:6 $si;
-t
.;i gai:i=;ggg*€ aggi fji3 ffi3fE ifiifilFFf :ijifffi IEif iiiiiif€ j i€ FE ii i $i,f iiI E $jFfiiff FiEf;if F ; : ;i :t g j g*f ggiig gi giiii g ggiii igg ii ig;
€ ; i 5g = gF,
z
r fl o
:sEr; ;x€ : F f ig$' €ssx€egf g ;+ i g€Ei ; F: F ! : E. P + .x!
( g \ ? _ :
-s;ft
* F q €:r :i t' P T as ; i : i ilra
* e'ct
v
+ : s i
*
. rd e
>
5 ; d
\!
.
;is
:g.F {E:
> - . -
s€ €53
s t
.
g>€
v
-t
€i
rf P
sg€ 4:e
S,i a
V
o-9?
>
*.+Fi
lsi
-
P
SP? R
: i j :
{ /j
rE:' t
i . f ;;f; ; f ; E ; ; s : J ; i " '3;?i ggi*g e;E;.1 Cig$ i;g33g
, r g: r ; F =-*. !EE. o; i=t c: R :+r €E ; g: g Eg ; "F1 isr !+i :: lIsi
+ q " ! t ! ; S : ! u i e d ^ a E i E o s- E $ F : s at'S i.s€
Eyl
b
N
'6S.e
9 ? E i
;
bD o
o .s
o
3
bb
6
. v 9 !
b D i
6 3 ( !
^ @ u
u Ee A S S E T i :s ? : l E N S -.' gi : x" tsJ3
x E A - r \ E
slrE s.$*_E5g
-.i
6 a o S EF S i ' S * F E S
Pg
s s i EI : i E " s ! Ec I s # f ; $ t $ ii -H i f rE .+S b *I:" s-l F"
;F?E.S TEE.
E $ i E i j € ; i F : 3 S E ^ d g P . . t a { E
E?S
Fi l = _! $ j EE l sEt ;e ; * s E s € € , 8 ; .dFs "E-SBaF.sEE€; *s "!
E "
$s € s
$ {s.$ ; t ss E
$F$isr
SES$ F€
(n
€) q)
€ o Fi a
o
!{
{tiiEiiiFe i;giEE ii* E = : t : . ; $ ; 5 € i3r #g ; * E '
3giigi ii;itls *fjiiis gfsg Eiiisi;if ifi9ii; is;ift;ffigfaiifi{is €ifiliisfif€€i:iiE€Fi
o tn
t
U k
H
tr q-b tq(!
a a
r
(n
! E t^
; i
; o C A >
* lggisgifisjiiiggg ii3iill:i:ii
Fi€Fjfidg i gftgf ffgfiig*gsgim Fgiffffii'gfffg ffflrujggggsr * g igffgg;siifirfsFsff;g
f FE.i fsgffffffgiifiiifiFi iFFFifliji
O
o
fl d
qJ
bo bo 5
g € € * $ * t E ; : € ? 5: ; ;; ;I e ;
E i : E * r , F t5i ;i q E * t E E E q E
lri
c)
(J
(U
f.
x
q)
o
u
G
tr
(J E
(a (a cl
(n
li
iiigggigisiiiiigiiF s igir iiiiiigigiE€itg €€ isfiFiiii i g : ;i:iiigaifiiisii;iiiiii SjE;iiiEg:gf:gi iiEi;i Iii;Egli€ ;ii€;Ifi Effi $i{gii€ iti{rfii;gEif; jiiiii;iiiiisiiii I Fii E ;igiii iiiiF;i:' E ijiiii
i;gi;;gfi iisii*iiiiiisigiii;ggg
g* tlEgiig!ggjig fiiijigsiigiigsg
; ;-iiii;igjf!i5f6$f ii;iiiif f;[isf if 5g g iig$ ;i;gi I ;g ff ;iigf iigi ! *if;gigruggg* gg i#ffigfigirggs iiflii il f$ iifgig igig€;ig ggiF;g iii;ruirii;ff igsg iffg iE i;ffig fsii ig,
*
(o i
^
i
. a
.!
I
o
a
r i
q =.i
L
'F 3 : z-f v
cJ €
$ E i 4K !
E iiEmE
.
-
'
d
_
s ^ ;
-
!
L d
t
6
>
;
-
P
> .
c
E ,
A
:
'
Q
:
= ' n = : o
,
;.EEE,i
a i., F;+ * 9t x i d.
9 C i .
:
a >
s Q = &L , >c 1 3 9 6-0
* €F;!{
T F b A H 5 fi'F.E c H> F ' 8 . 9
-g I IE Ie
€ z
e; ' Fs: E eF . : 6 ER!3?,2
T E E g i !U t d d.{: .fi 6F- . Ei
+ : Fr b ;
i En 3 s i A E E ; & ;
isEiigEiilliia1EEiliii liililgiiiiiii il li iiliaiiiiiiiii iilli€tfi€ iiilillliiilii iliiliiallisiis eillilililligliii:taiiltl
i€E;EE; EfEafr::EEEEg$+
E ,€?; u$cfs€i $f$H;f;a:g seE *€ , EF€''
Fi€ri$,i$i'tress€'u
fgff€,giiffi#iifsisggg gl;i€$i$i c{$Ei ;eii*-€E€;es;: i i€{ii iifj3gii-jEFigEi;ffFgg fiif,€ f i iiif
;iiiEiis iiiiiiii igi i:i,iiiii
;;riiF=a3iaffjfiEsgigj;:** $iu,?,sf +sr s
o G
F{ o t(
c 0'r
**liE ;: ;i tiEgt t i Ei€i; Eifa3ig €
iiiiiFiiiiigi€iEsisgiiiis iiiisiliiliilliit;ai€'iii'iisi cE $3Ei3Ei€g*3!igiiiE ii:ifiE*sEi
€' €; E;
L 6
d L
(d
bo
: = ; : € I i ig€€; f €e € ; E * € l ;r?€i i
o
.
-
a
c)
o
o bo
r ()
i
a o o ,
0
d
3
g 1
O
(.)
3
bD
q)
a
q
-i
5 v
= \
i; g; €i ;:iE
q
o
o
o
t
q): Y
l-l
.:{
' 3
C
C)
bho'
r
>.
q ( g 6 N 5 t r
o > c .9P ot ? . ! {
^ c d : P
o . ; . ! t r o 0
O
!
d
o
:
F
"q
a. 1
o € g .::>9 - 9 0
bo.:
3
b D ! -
? : x
€o s9 HI
o.c I
i
€!.t cbo x:
x tc) 0 , ( !
o
T 0i
N
F ? boj
7 2 >
q
o
Q
^ ( J
q
b 3 9
^.4
Tt
iiig:ii€€fF
Q
a o
,
O
o
I
{)
(),
E0t
a
c) L o
i
ss ,i€etigEagrBa; € : g E i € Fj $ r :s* *i rt { Ei HE € i I gif€ff ;EIi gs: s3'' g€s ;ei bf 'E,E F ;g€i,E ;Ei A z E ? ; { A f ; sE i E € t E, i;EEF;E:fii H$i : i E :! i r E $ : F EsE€*ei$ci€g; q€E Ffif€ *: ii E;*cE €5E HI$ p rEi-c! q J 42 1 6 . 9 r a i v '' Ir ( ) o
_ g : i :F * ;ist p ti i liggf:tigE'ggi"
- ' a q)
bo
s Frifli*-'€.;5 E F g3 g $ $ : e E g a E . ; EfF: i ;: F ' FgF " : g n $ g i g
'''ffuiiiiifisiiigi€giigfif *;gi€{3i"'-r' ;'i, 'S€u*;f* FisiiiE;trgfi isir is; iigi; iiiigggiifj sggg;ffgiiiijgt giFigii$ g iiig;j ij;iiisi3ii iiiif€ii iiF€ fi i f
e
,
O
tn q,) ah a q) |i
th
c) lr 9 t. a I
N
E
q
u ) = O
E
.
:
!
E
9
o
I
!
L
9 r
';
-.c
>-
:q,) Fi
=
x
e
z
> . : 0 . : O
) i
4 . lL GI
a r v
E
u - c
i "X; P ? ;
n
:
3
bo"': >
U b -
R
6 E 6
6 9 -
- c-
-
! d ! /
-
q 7
-
d(=
i q
EY qE Y = >, u'a
G
3 "
. b 6 ' 6
-'
T b H
: e! 3' 3 i . 9
;
sE o - i
9 ! i ' 6
Irq E f€ sE; i x_i = - :
. 9c ,- 3 2 3 E c
*
E u.! r 6 : 2
9
f
a",i
PhE;*€ Tit
i-
E E I t e t S : ; f ; i u c ? ; >
2 g ^ o r - : - ! - :
5 ll I
l u , n c d c ^ 9 i i
t H E P;';
=
t
r
=
C
x
o
'
o
= -
o
z
>
;
L
3 i .5g G: !; b: gi E ' E9 :3; :
d d
;
.
*
:
q
n
E E : i € E €a T V 6
v
d
3's E
F ,_ ^dd
.9 3€ c s 9'i
O
Z
r
,^
.:; o d P 3 i ?^ : =0 3 ^ - a t - e q G Y S q Y ; ; F
u
.E 7
d
;
h-
;
€H
O 3 Z€ f rg E F ET
h-
gg ggf #si fgig rujf ffig gf ffjf f f Egf ff ; ssf:ffff ryf f igff ifff
iiiiiiliiirii{iliiilii lE:lssliiii a?a?iii
ili Ii;iliii:iiiiiiiia* ilff;iiiiiiii'igisl:
:
-
r
O
-
.
E
. . ;
5
\
.
C
:
6i
-
v
I
L
L
9)
>--6
,
6
o
4
^ - @6
q -
o
' -O
o
5" , ' d; ; r o -
?
O
t+;€
u l Y
E= E *
St 9 i
e -
S 3
9v;'7
Y :
o
r
;
e
O-E
C
O _
-d
. 9 9 8 , ! F tr t-s tr ^ - y ;.*:i ;
,C
d
c > . o + : . i d s t r 9 0 9
q
U 5 9 o . i U € ' ; : ; 6 9
( ='tZ. -A
U ::.9 i
:
-H 3E E3 s-l--
;
=
i
^ g
. c
' s
i
i'i
o
! d
o
od
O o
5
q=
O
E:aEcI
6 - s€. s - g; :e; !* lFa€;
s i l € r * 1 3 . : * - 3 c H= f f !
J , FE ! 3 E €F i
:5 st . i) i E ::;EF < € s E;
S ; c i il { i
-s gEF=,2,
; ; iEE*f
{
gF'$fif;9fu gi;i;;r igg:,fF s€i? FEi s'eaifit: giiiifiififu isffr;;;: a#isgsiii g€ gggf EgggiFff; igii ; € ri;gigFg€ O
3 f g60-.=it
o.^'! o' - ' - J t i - ' o ^ o O ^
gy#3gE 5gE€f rf i fi€;: i5
o
r
.!
f
l
t'-1
i -
o
l
(
' E G 6
i i 3 v
0
: Q o
!
n x =
i > , _ o O o
|
? . e . - = A
U al q ! l 9
:
x A
3
p
d
6
, . ^
5
(t)
H g
o.r
= E k
,-
U ) :
^ o x i f
F
d F t r
^ =
R c i ; o S *
< u
q-
F ' s - : -
\.:
=
':i
.S : F s ;.:
g
a s s r a
si R
P :
s:r:
E F F i l E - I S s_
e \ s.I € EFE5
X
,
o x
F
.
^
;
o :
a
^ !u
r
-: a
r '
O !^ i X t v X i ^ "
\
o
-
E
:
=
" . i . 4 o J
, +=
ot e
? u.
Pps
a
c O
U h S U
I
^- t ; .
(
6
r -w d
; ,
I
J - C + s cd I tl 4! - v
' ; a = o t r t 6 r l O - a L 6 lr
+ I l e ld
:
*X i i X J
::
J
A
>,;.i,,i v
o
tr
c
d-
.= !
!
9" O
Ii iI$iEi;i!iiiii ii?iiiii E€l 3iiiiiiiiiiiiIillgi{ii
.**lrs*sF{*a
Fr.- E !-S
} E T F .
- \ t S - i ! o ' = S 3
S E'i
3.S f,N {
: Y
E c
Y
6
2
q
'iit€s:sds; -
4 'l A .= : ? .! '< = t
^ T l,
:u
'o t , \ \ s :
-I
6;
r
Igg ii*sffii€iiif rgiiifiisgifiiiiif€ figifggiiiigflisifjiii€i:{f f
gii€i{ggsf€fifE
SgffiiiFlii;gig .fifi!Eli{igiFE ' Fgffifiiiifiii fi3ffif€3€fiii
>' lr o o
X (lJ l-l
o
o r
i l
b
*
o -
f
: 5
;
@ i
$;
.9? $= E N m b
:
tElEilS
ao
E
Ee
B $ - Ein'ts i-l 3 ; I : ; f i a gd Y*'q q € ;: EI E € ti i o e ;= , ! 3
l*q
F = 3 E : u r i F f ; E u ; ; - s a : Ee i $
- T 5 € E ; a1i E # F , ! . i: F-i*qrr .l:
x
= . i i
e -.b@'F.--*Z*t€
€
r
; f; s i ! r , H , H € g i F f-iE;,$€1gE s 9g .E 3 T . ;i d 5 i - i r r i r s F ; $ r E i ;E t r g : ; Er ? e g r : g l E € € F ; E p _
-
t
$ $ ;
,
n
E a ': ;
,
I
,
i
B
$ $ + $ $ €^ ; f F $ " = " f: € ? € ; : : i * : s ; * r r 3 5 F AI s e * - ; i '
$ c Es
* g a : =g! E$
; i:;$r i5tE€iFFiiIi€IE€;t;lifie:;.
S
s $ F ,e
E ? a
E^{ ;
i i g g*: c t E €f i,€i pr r c jt:iai !gg - 3 €
: r V ? ! ; ; : €y g :i - i t € g f ; 1 ; : ? r ! ? s; { C : € ; s EFi = Ji € Eg t * f ; 3 E jI :*if r; a : : iE ; g ; H E ; :;€S,Fif*"faa <
ilEiilltulililiiililrr
*
&'
€ E
O
:
^
q$
s'
€E i ; ?* I
^
E
d
c
:gr*l
rT
!x
:i'
-
i::g;E E-s
E
E i
f 5; E-q -E ;e e+;q-f
N
q
; E f ; 5 f ; { iE * f l ; i = ; Y g a ;E * g E F-}q E o
: F
d
i
.
I U = d ) \
N
s;*isc E=i{]:l€Eg €iE*ti[E$3 i -{s3 ()o()
N
(-r,
!t
d r
-
o
E. >
X55-
OOO
o
8.
Eb o
a
O
d(jd
s; 1 a E € ? f i l " j * € $€F r1 , 1s ;1 d' aEiEcl-e:€H-- F iFro; € + F : + s, *s .. =i a- _o o'Ai eE =: :: 6: 'i S q EHtsi*i:*
Er e ;i^:e?i b^
yi - € P
:
a 1
' '
=
^
-
t
o N
d
d
d
O N F
O i e
i
d d
=
.a X + S^ -
o
@
: ;
^i*- g-.b- S € i ? x-= t_q ; g ! ; r :- J . :i -' l o
;< e,c
.:
!
o
j\
o-
s t'!; s€E 5 m ; E : F i
i a.! iA S'9 E - XG s-i.: a
c
:
;
b
6 6 d € 6 5 \ UC.) O(J
3
- 3
t
S,
5 (J
f* 6 n?q; s : x Ei';* lsli eqE.e gsf+iI$i ;:oi1-.,{A iE+E
T
.4"
_ '
E= EF . g g E ; E E = * T E E ' ' 3 € d * g E E; E E E: g[ Bg: :
: + : t Y ' A d . d d ;
o . : F : . =
r;*brii i rsi;i iE Es'i€l;l i;.'; ;;€€;?;
(J
F; i e(-)
? o {
s
?.
: :3 E :; ^ 2
; ; - ; = €; i s F: i ?s tEs: Et : €un; - € i t ; f- a c :; -g*t?tt gsr $ *
:
oooa-()
e
c9OO
ooo
ou
OO--O
q d
iddc:96
o -
,*== ;;T
-O
E: * - E - d ! ,! ; t r *3{ Hairs ! : { f g { i i € n € r : $ , p ^ : H G : 3 . ; ! E i : * € : t I : B : ; * l ; E " t. tE ; a ; *$:4r jeAji i i io? zq - di yo d- dyn_ z E ;.* ; -E= tE; gt Eg : S$= r- F3 =E t=g= i: g E =-=g.: E ? Xs\ a r , sE = n € ' - : . 9 f t f t f t G i E d u = = = = a =
c: ooOoc.)
. €
;s i?n * 3 lE : ! E r + t - : f;
*g-3ii .,li+;.,9;3 E € : : i i i i ; i ; ; [ f : t i ? = i a E : r i * ; - _ _;:]ru* .i e
- i E E : * i s It r r T r s = i u E : € ; t E ; : ; i F € r n r € F E E = E ; i E !;;s; 'ti sT E: ;Ei r€E!E€ES r; !* E ? ; ;=*iu ! ; ; : i * lt i i € i ; E l l f c *t i=; i e } ;
I \
;
:
s-
I
$ *q , *
3
E
.
U
3
O O O
;? * $ $
i "ii : $ ir
E
;
;E : F I i E ; ; } t E ! i g F F F ' c * : J[ .EEEE E E = : C3l tU ? 'I ; ; €Ee; U %
ai
s s.!
" . i u = *' $ i . : l : * u i ; I l3.3 i- , ;*r EE; gEi Bs l*F;$f t;Fv ;
; q + r : ' = i , i : ? !l ^ $ l i * r Fz ;
- 3 r ; - p € : ; l e:;:i+g; : i i : - a y! l; iqs " E 'iiilE l ' t* ?
i jf E + I! :::;=-c;€ E i i t ; ? i i | f S e i ? a ; l = ?i *. ?* X t;;;! 'i-.3E jE-;E;i iEE; E; { ! s s ; =;;s;iii;,;;;EF:=:;s33
*
d
X
E
x
:
;
t
i
g
!
; ;
A ;
6" g
!
a
::
E 8
o
-" {
s
@ 6
: o
F
;e
s
* r €r
@ X;
:
?
i o
9
E
:;$i
l
:
Bs
!.ur^:
eE l,;=
i=:.q
N
:
'
€^
* .T: o^; T .e:
"
q
d :
s
E
^F F.:
Ci ;E
,:.s
rE
5 ,* f €' € ; T g Ei ?E : g q a + : i ? " ! E *=l = s F F:+*:E; ge; E E g r!; $;gF gI
I
s E - :
y 3 n { S ss 1 *$!5_
s
e ; +; ;
!
F *
;
:Hi €E
i a s; : ; =t I i $ t E ;. _ E :i . , r , , ,F q l ; , q u s
; ": B
S S - * ! i : * E E t t , S F ; , S * * j ; ;: * t - T f d F F E F ; $ S 5 : R g
f E ' ! ; i Ei ; : i " E l : ; $ ; : + ; j ^ " 9 ; F; u tan +r $: ;E $ t ; i ' e E E *ec;ai sEi t[ .E F irgEE{i E li ta; i " i ; i i
s
$ {
;i
: ;E €= ; fe e t 5 FI .*f!Esft*E3q:;;F?iEE=l;:E
ai;:;$i€i E:::"Fii{,ii;E eEai F i$fE€ iEE:;sFff-5 !j*E:;S*jlgi! €ai€;iE3s*ssiFF5F;tsiiFf;fE jgEgj
EEEtg-;:r;r{ '- ig ; sHse s;i;- $ a
: * * - i = i " . i g ? ; E , i q i*{, i - i g i ; € ; ! 1- I " it u t
g E , . ; i..:: i i s tq s; :e+Fi*t 'r; 3 ? 6 ? ; , ; r=a eg ; 3i *g[E _fcit?3ll*$_;,g;
Es;f :; i : =i :_: ; ; i i E i -i €A iEi i3E : e t : E ? is* i ,giag
o
ooo
r Ee E ; i aFgEgEt i i $EE ? ; ; ? € i t ' l i 5 iE € gF * iEEgEE $ s$€r E
a
s E S i :ti,=; .*tis E g i E = i i r
E +€ , si ? ; i , :i + i t . : * , $ *F i s s ;, $ *t * ' i F , a E i =
uili:' *
;:;s?r,gt? IFiEii* istSla,'i.l,i { i?-i; -st =$$ui -St =*5 IS rgs s g:E gE ggj 3s sgj E 5i i; ; ; gg igg3-5
N
U
S
si=i$
i
s €q;
$ $t 9';-i$ $EF ! s E$i ; : i i += g ;ai . s $ n , , * $ ; s- $ g
E; sic i{s.f;a ;5s, riaFiliiFFi'ifui;$ sfr$$€ *5gsJ$lag *gi$5;;;;tir:;+;;+$s'$iSg sss.$ 5f5 i s F
s
!-
€
ggfEg€g€iigf ,;*s3 fiii€F€sii*;€s€ii;d $$$,:e€
; u 3 * + : : : ;t !g: ?. ,s9 " ii ui i o qg :; U ;{;3g=n, , u = [ ; €- i €: i € g $i* - ; ; i g ; $ t r ; q s; Et i; .s gggggs,,, 3rggi €*g€; rgiFg,E*a#= j so*sssg$;€S
,gnEq s
. ; $ Ei a r ? s ;g€r_ € ; : ; i l 3 5: 1 : i .sa ? c "zl o , E =$p ? € fx ;ritf€ulinsqifisE*iaqs*? r ,tl.ei ; q t i g : ; gEl*.;, iSt:sgi$i€_; ?Fi?EfEEiiii;sisiiiE
€
E ""
i
r '
r u
r
ei
O O O O O O O
€
O O
.*
O ( 5 O O O O v v v v
I
co
u u
EEtEf E -E ; ; c i eE €aE ;€ a€l r t ; ? * S t € ; S * S* rF s? €?F€F
s a * s
$
i ;€i ?.ai, i;*:? ;"l E€ :-i$ f **E
*:'riif;5i!gi,l*gia .,i;iiu:;€a ;i;1*Eii.
- u ; 6 : : € r ? ,riE i *r,€s: rstH + *3= i F::tu srEilE*3j iF$,'=n$ ; Fg*FisssE i f f Fi5 E3:!*Sg5;i i
P
E
S
j
^
Si
1S
;
-:
f
:
-
S
f,-
Z ;E i S A i
.J
.J
q " i a 6 ^ ? g x
,.r r
<
=
S N +
:? -:
N
-S-s
i
v
-o
R
' '^
.
-?"
-qS
: c
d 5
gl*
ijjijj
r
4
f
E-j.'69 .F;:9.4
I
*
. s
Q
d *
(
d
f
-o q
o N
C
C
N
Y.E3 s':i
$-, o r
-
*
-
d
rirl j
N
-
o X i . * 9 P ;: d
H
j
H
v
H
'
i F'
s -$ |
\
*
9
s
\
o D
:
p
i
S
r \
^
o o o a "i -il^
H H
-
<
&
\
)
;
I P - : d q
V : x a v\a = < -
S € - O ? i N c t r N : :
.Y |- R / S S 1x ^ . ;^ \ i d < b d 1? h \ c r - - ' l
i
.$419:>tt
;
-
J d
o 6
= '
i
=
H
h
c
.
l
N
: J
-.
X
?
d E
Z
d
E
o d <
L
bo
o E ;
bD
'
*
,-.-E'Il*;.i i$;t*5*$i=;sr€g€ SoJ-s s * d i E i n; A; .r- ! x,.i:
i g o f ^ 8 : . E E : g € ; , - - - € 4 f t - 1: r s Eyu;;dE gF*-3€;;EEs=l;lEl
:.F J.; d::TR;R:
tfqrs jj
N 6
c !
F
t
'i;
6
- d
- r -
6
: ':
-
U
|s : € E
N . .
d
: 1
H
=
d
!
o
a'J99P .Y .Y
J
'lFltJ
!e Fp E €
u9
ci i
gi ": i
b si35F'E€ $ E$ s A s F r
oz.: oL,
6 ' ^ $IEsx.ggi+ : ^ lr,i,.-Eqgt'EEE ^ F " . * : i > F . E Ee - f iF9 ; 33 -. x\ : oX '?i ' - -1i E: - F io _y ?1; 3 o* H : F o i ^ : J E ' ^
1 h
E €g $ Ei -; ,i- "-;; 3* t = € t; =d .sFi r EI ; ! ?g s utuE € -E$Egfgg g ; ? A i a s' ! f a $E
.9
r
3;€€t -Ef q
: ; N
i E N ; ".F
*3 h
ci'E s .l3 "' @ l:i^ € . l E € E l - ? i .l i1f o1 ?r gr t} ;S * i { 5 , E
* & ' ; Y s . F e E . i SI g f " o S r i i 3 ; q ! : i : i " > s { b r i , * dF A i ; g t $ E i; e H g i - - r l
:* q
;iiig
: " g? { Jt ?: if'^r; f
E: i Ts r d *F €r r xs* ? r t € ss ;gS e f F
E E . . . i H
a iri
i =gaii":i € - i i = €E gi irg € p; : a l r € : * € E a . : r ; ; g = + 7 7 : ; * a r g ; c r e i :;rqr i ; ; i l r- gE ; i t q ^ ; E e , ; : & g r i . " E ! r E {- . * ; E
rE; r€ € S : ; i F-; { * = rs :! a r aI E € r: E = E :Fil i - € i € F :; € ; : H ; € a E E g ? F gEEl . I TgE; EE g i I; : f E . Ii;€ : aEE .F: EE:E E;[ F ; FF; T=uI I ; E E F E
g
r
a
,
i
i
d
?-i-
? (o
$
t
q
?oE E
r
;ls
Eg;
?; xo
{ i * * i : i c , e i n ! c :R r . i i
,! - ;A
* Es' jEiEsE *EE .s E i ' E . E ; Es E g E=E5 ;t ; ET ' i ;3 F :- T- =: E ; sE - s? s v O i - ET=; L 2 : S - S i
t
=r'P.
Eu . € ; ig: { ; g ? * ; : !i € = s:u; g i Bi ; : } c * ; *:a::qE;E3 Es i ; t t E i ; ; 1 s ; p - ? i q ; ;t :E9E- = i iE ?€ n aEiz>e - Et F b i : i j Fi , r l E ; : =Ha z z* € €F € : €F E f r i EE E E Fi E
E€E"i € : €€ -F ;iEE E;F--f'?;! e i; .gr tFe!!' f;g i 'i€l F :F; g EE'*sE E € E ' ; E* € f
3. ;
h
jX €x 3
E
S i
I &
-
; :
€ :$ $ :sss?*
$"
3
;si
"it$
€ p
:. +
: a i g * " sg: el
:
E : l
,;
€
:
;
E
s
E €[ *3; €5! ir $ l q g $
(
-{ z= ^ - : s s
^u
!
r s e ] * = , i ; g l E i *;: t f ? ! - q t u ;! " t ? ; ; ; S ? E + s ! l" E ?eJ};r;€;F**$ F q:s;* ! t A Ei i E EE; ; ;i s s g !- 6 = +
I i
* i
E sc'r ?
L
d
$ [ i
: E i
rs
j :
i e
a ; * *-€ * i a
s : . {
-t p;
:E !I
E; E t i; r ; i { s iF g a ; s g " ; $; r= r€E; t E i ; t € * ! .*: ej <e sui I q J Eq F . {l } = € d € + : ss s F " ]f E )- .E z- E ) .-2E2i,i: zFr+. zl ii F . z:z: .H;;.;.:i '. ft EEEt A A ' . : ' r ! * S SI E t & dg S
$*
; s . t ; e i i $li:.;. € € Sl p i l : * ; * 5 i f i € ; S F sesTSarE t ,r ;i ; * g E f i 3 ;*$' ! $
u€
^
!
: ^
:
x
E
d
i o
E-! :-€' € 3 -} :-l rl *.,'$*. + rqe:
$ i l e e n € € Ee c
?
= u i : ' * € i i t ::€f 5€ F i ; ifsr $ ; i i E ;r*gc=i ;iil t s ; 'g;5gsjjgg€gEgg !$:ig$ss;,gjgggg!g9g*€gstjs: ;f s 5 =
S;
, si : € E rT{ rri l€ s; = f ;$i 5
! ,?* E i
*i $gE
. q t * =i ts i*l ti € s t : i E s S : ; E r ? ri * E i iE 5 -e i E 3 o E$ u i " i + i € i
s
N !
s
i - " j
j j
' T € . -e r . i *
>
T p i : - i a ci Ea € l f i f
i; 5E;i €gF"=E[;[FE"| ;i ie€Eit*'t9r'l:i$ii" E !o
$
$ i ; $
?$ u si Ee {{
?
{ s s r r E r € $ s eE; is1-4F p i t € . € f i -$f r€FiEf FtS5s Erti;liur?E :u*?-i€€g€i3gt rgitEf $
$ . 3i=
; q t - c e : : :" 6 - . t =
t5iiif'HsE =iii*,t;*i;'iii ls tE l--t;,1i ;!,Ei,;; 4 F t ; E €i g
.. * *: : n.*r.i:.+:; iiy
d
6
9
!
o
O
.=
d
d
>>
G
O
a
d
d
d
d
d
G
d
6
d
N
d
d
6
d
d
d
: s g ; g Et = a a a -E=i r ; i j ' t € I E ! f E ; f f Fa F E . i c r c :{ iI E + igi : r E '=E* ! FEa Ei E! 3 *i E g E : €E : :i ? € :e+? * fi+E; : ; pPl s*E:s €
= E a A = = E E E ZE E - i : j - = ' 5 : - =r : ' e E . !a - . b . u E ji : . E ; a ; ! ^ EB
)i
; ', E
i y , uu =€ -*g !g ie [ $l-.;is:f;;B { *i, ; ; i i E i gb
g r ; * - ! ; ; A = f i * s $ t € i* t gu *
*
E . aT r i
;tiiii€tEl.is€ F$ rg* E*;a;i= f;,i. ssu.$IuiEf
?
l"e
'rr r :
(o if;
.p i
? fi !
-^:€ 3 g g gr €Ea;-3.= €r :ai 's; ;: i ; j i € : ; t-giij sir; t;-; EEsiE $ r € s-rFFF'= gs gs FF= F = ; i i 35 f$ g
g -
Ei. i i gg ig.ff'f$=gu + q ;i,,f ;g flf_ s-f
= ' E
E n
e
ia eR -o-
SB
$ v
p
n I*
:i * f:E!gtl ' g . s " i r : E ; . F : : *! 5? ';*gi : r € q € : . a 6 : p , ;i ;t :i *: : H: $ t : = s + € E ; r ! * E i : g ; : g g € i ; : 8 . . $ g + t :€*;F €"i E :gr[ ;€ = p e eE i i fi s Frt{ g E i : ! E s ! 5 ;e:g: E E a E :x E ; a faiaE . rg ro - ;o E =Et E F F EHTF g E F " * E ? * * t . E E : *$ aE * ;;- 8 6 € g
d, : J'g .5'
* i3 i . ^F $g Ee ${ ^T is E ; gE bs ;i $i-fl: _€3 i :E !=. q e ? E * ' q $ E e f i F - * e Ei * ; t i E f . F ? e E E s "eS E ii fp ;: : p . f g. a - - i ? r; .l E; F] q? 1t *ss*Ei T"HE^ s3 E5*e ;HI *:rE6 -i EsgE; i?sXsF s { Ft {?! :€ l E i C A s Ee i " F ' s i E
r ei
e
?, i
+
I
E
E * ;E *:
;
'e
- ' F :: :, : E € @
:T€
s i : " E f E; ? ; e d : t ? E ; i : - t r t E ? t
i;
sl
! !E 1 ! i: " ; ' g S i E i ii i : EE€;eE" ks € c s E E "=x s a: s-! E e p s1ieE - ; [ E- xf - t ; i t t =t ' E; + F ! E a ; r€E i€ gSEiq+= = E t : : ; Ab"FE^i '*Ia, 'F $ 'uFi H HErr yE f b€t;sf Cg F { * EE t f ; fH 1" Ec ^. a- ^b E ii^s^$i^s^:^EF^E ^ i " * f , : :t ' i " F I f "F"qfA
r
! : s € E -:
;sE-r {i : €.; ;-t€uE;.-=,i *A;u;*€;-
" : ! - E :g Ei i u i y s E ; i + 1 f ti:€+: s i q { $ F i i - € * B _:,;*
i l aE;EgEFES l i ; ; sst; ! =i#f ,=:E5SISF*;*;3iiggi;E Ea * ; F ? r ;H,ug F =qi ? = :; i! It ; i z i i { [ ' *E €i ; : '5E; ; a5553
F =
:{
.
,
I
e
r
-
; E
a
!. g* ,{
Er lgu+ gS
i! q i
qg
$ g
tg i S s*esE? g :E
;;sgi*s
? E E { i ; 6 " " ti
q
q ::: s : ; A qsi,*:ei==i:at scgf €*: ;i€l;;:-tg€fit:i ?u= €! =
i9 3 ; 4 ' : : ; ; E i EE i € ;E e c ; g r , q] E E ; ; E " "q{ g _F5iE g:;; g : E ] F E 3 J r, =
-
3i *
$
q
f +
?
r,
€
5
: csj
E
o
-s
m
S
d
s
{ *
ql:
g E !*;sE. -^ r ; s ; €
€ i i ; t ' = a ? ;t . * i - } =E - g * * ; E E * E F E i ; ' *
€i"$ 6 *s,
;s
$
9,f Ee ; .g 5g E "=f E * i E A ? E.3E?TAE r" E=*E8€" €€e;;EEE g E i E **?EfIEE gE € #Ee €E€E€E3€E;F i5
d
s *i
r ":
;
= S'i5
:
T q s i: ; i
Isir+:a=ii fii:?is!€arigi€iii: F;?sE€FEgiE :
F V
{
s
a
: A [ : H s
*:
te€ ?s*s€g ; *i $ l ?"qE;=€[ g e85xE=: E s s EEE? s : 3 z $BE EE;E!x;*; ;*: *EjEs:jEjEe FiFE i Eer a i ; E E E il E E E S S S4f t
?,
* ; ? ? ! , s ef E t
-
fic
-^o
'^e
3 -
; d
qi
A
r
?
s{ *=}
i r r g € %* $ : E ; o . ; € . : r i 5 ; ; g *;;";qj:;a;uEn"[;*?=']l:i'€iiE?g ; i ? i . 3 E 6:i * : € €er E + t * t i € i A i i i _! q! €* ;i i E €
i €
,€rs;?r-,,?=iE€ Eiii,-$iE's:' ii;g;. ?*r:;ii?i;!;iii iiu€;E r* :gE Hl.€i;-ii=Ti-lE;i€ ; : e ; 3 ; € A a i 5 3 ;,qtii€;ss;t;ia;i=iEe;;;3Zz*€ Et;!5 i
:r
ss a s: < I "Z Vz €: l t ? + Fl e ; l €g gX; f r {1 6z z! ; ii r Eg: t ; E! I ; ; t : ; i E g* i :=E. ;Ei EE € i; i ; r y : t {< e : ; E i E :$ ;Er + a :* . t ' - zj E 3
€E ' te: g6Ai ;+.' g friiE EYi e. lEge :eie;EEs F 'EKB -E/-u, du. $ 5 E t E = a g € a=Er E ^?ST i'Y il {aEEtt
H
€
i
€
s
i
; -e € s € i E € .l o{ -- il il ,r $ E g $.sig isa€ *{;ui$ ig=€ **: ,*i[;a,-;i;;f
;irfr.€€€;f
E
:E $E E
E € t
E-?qtiE;;E
r
; q
€'
5s
R
'sT € e;e '^5 sF
; r E $ $gsg $ i.Et;}:E'si sqT;;*x.";;€:=;l
? +
c-irglu;g*i$H5;t3ttt u€ r?iiE*€gi g ' E - H i i =E gE r cf ,i ; 3 cEaE; ! * i t n t : gsi E i € e r $: i;E: i.s$sui F s F e ? E A F E * a g g s € e € : a * E € € i g 3 r E B 3 g a g g ? € i a
$
_as$
i; qis;xii A;ci; i; i uiqi i;: I*5iii fgg,_;:EE r Et €*E':t iE u*tgF :lg:E+t€€€EE*E$,*Eiu*;?' e€sE s
€ ;
€ ?
r
i
:
9 ' * A ;; e = si n
';ai{ s
t
[? i =..r*;
e;E {
I ;
i
*E!i tEEE HEEi € c i d E €, 6t f r r i " i l g 8 . EoEFH E E Et F Ft r! 8 .! -a! d Fr-iFF Ftrtr tr{:FF Fi F Fi:FF FiiF{
G,
;; -; :i s €Esg" q r i € * , ,
g ; 7 e " ; - r y :€ s ^ * l: .EE ;; 1 e ? u g r s l t ee!? _ l E ;;;= l s l g ; f i t ; E e i = e r * E € E!F : q s ! € = s " ' $ g . a r *dE a e ;QFh1; ir ea :, ei " i } ; Ee . E t 5E:ia::
{ : ; , E : 5 r . * Eg : F
[; rE'Eirigi E *iiA*i!€g lEi+Eits* :c€::+3,sti lEFE.;
EEEEEE
t
a ; ; i - * ,
e s
E ;
r-?s + * tELxixi E x x=* €* t5i Ei rEz-i 'E; ;s- E i E x E; .; 3; i* :-E- ';ei EE E € E r xu4.,-Ea4 a€+ aEa
6 : {
* { g 1 ga ! - g; l i a ?i i€ €i ?
it :i: ts.'i - = ? -; E E - 7 t r ; * € ? $ = q : " 3 3 * :t F : l ; ; . q" - ! a : * : q T S :- , a = - 1 ' * t ; t f i tg?t - ! i l * € E;qi r y i ; E; = f : E E i iF; f- : " ; ; ; t ; i i ' r t ;Er , ei ;* E ; €e =
; a i i : 1 ?EEEE: ui f*air 5 ! .If ?E- ; -i6 g i-$: t 'E ; ixiE E F ; i EEr ? E E - d ?l- = = 6 s 3 . s . s . ! : . ! E.! a e:ArE"s s Ea EE E e E E EE - ku , , E E E E s ; , ; - ; g = F A F F 3 3 " i -
;;
f
6
o 2:
F'z
:
n
;
@
@^ b
P
5
EE-. i=
2 g
B5
.= =
P=
'i
=
.5f
c
!
.E.s
:: '=
.tE
a
.s {t
7
i1t :{ it t; r=-: ef rq rr* ts +E Fg =7* i t e E cs : E : e ?
i l f € ; g r g i g * Es c z z € t t e t ; : ; s * i +* g
s !" *i' ;* t€n^;i ;l E ; :Fs[ E i q i A ;€ 5 ? ; E E l Z ! : {* i?* igts* +r :s:, e r s- ;ee?:
; E f! ! j F { ; [ : f j,i i i €
TE RE o,
:i
?rp
t-
iS
E
s! { ;
o
; E:usrf E: !i ?i fi s { E
5 :sIj{t;iilrEE?;g:
.
3.8 ;
=sEa ; $ + ^, ?r +y Ei :^
E rE : i E r S i t ; : - " - - E r;Ep i {- :r $
Ys ,o f E P ! + l + , 3 5 * o t r = : , ^ a fE , ; i . $ E : i t I E: ; ; ; : u H i ; g : ; + t * r E 9s R 9E a % d i = , . ' E l t i * E s e E E a Z e * ! iE: q Ei ;* - b i i B ; - ! d = : g E t i r S u * : = : { $ E gE { E : q
e i ! { ;s c! FE f :i g € t * g gs:st i!f a E E ;
$ s 6
s.
\ gE ;
t
i
i il
'. E ; ' ;"
E - i 4 ;
+ -
g
i € €
'-;lE ;
E : E E ; , i
r - gs !e^! to r E l f s I
!
g i!_+E i ! q : Fg € : ; ? i *
: " 3 q !t ; = i c i = € l ; i i i s g i E t t q * r t i , j t = : € = + . 8E * e g
a
I
E s E E F; € E 8 r a t u S 5 = * t i g g = Ig SSS
3
E b
s
!
:!
3q
j'"i
>
c -#E ii s€ ii E F " ^ i i ! s : F : E i l p k :ti5i.i fiZEi E: E = s I r- ol Ei i+d . IE E EaiZ - E rc*= .; : {. : i oEo E^ r- i- l E * s . ;: arE x a-ec < co
H 3'
