The shift in Lacan's teaching
From The Madness of Each One by Jorge Assef
Lacan, throughout his teaching, made the same movement as the epoch. His first teaching, the classical one, consisted of a theoretical structure that is based on a consistent big Other, therefore the Name-of-the-Father was at the center. Lacan in his last teaching focuses on the lack in the Other, in the non-existence of the Other, and therefore reformulates the notion of the Name-of-the-Father - we say that he pluralizes it - because it is no longer about a figure that has to operate from the place of the father. Rather, the subject finds something that operates for him like the Name-of-the-Father - and this can be multiple and contingent. (p. 6)
This is one of the most succinct and understandable descriptions of two things.
First, Lacan's teaching shifted:
- From being based on a consistent big Other and universalized Name-of-the-Father
- to being based on an inconsistent Other.
Second:
- Just because the Name-of-the-Father stopped being universal (i.e., the same for everyone), does not mean the need for the Name-of-the-Father as an organizing presence vanished.
- People still need something that will function as the Name-of-the-Father.
- However, what replaces the (universal) Name-of-the-Father is a (particular) Name-of-the-Father.