Podcast Summary: New Books in Psychoanalysis

Host: Miriam Sauer
Guest: Hélène Tessier, Editor of The Vocabulary of Laplanche (PUF, 2024)
Date: January 24, 2025
Episode Theme: Exploring the import, process, and key concepts of The Vocabulary of Laplanche and the ongoing relevance of Jean Laplanche’s metapsychology in psychoanalysis.

Overview

This episode features a deep-dive interview with Professor Hélène Tessier on The Vocabulary of Laplanche, a newly published, incisive reference work dedicated to the key conceptual vocabulary developed by Jean Laplanche. Tessier discusses her involvement as editor and contributor, unpacks central themes of Laplanche’s metapsychology (including primacy of the other, the sexual unconscious, messages, and the dynamics of linking/delinking), and situates Laplanche’s theory within contemporary psychoanalytic discourse. The conversation also examines Laplanche’s relationship to Freud, Klein, and other psychoanalytic thinkers, and considers the future of Laplanche studies.

Episode Structure & Key Points

1. Introduction & Background (01:34–03:40)

• Host Miriam Sauer introduces Hélène Tessier, highlighting her academic standing, Laplanche scholarship, and connections to psychoanalytic institutions.
• Context: Tessier’s career background, involvement with the Fondation Jean Laplanche, and her role as editor of the new vocabulary.

2. Motivation and Purpose of The Vocabulary of Laplanche (03:40–06:44)

• Rationale for the Vocabulary:
  • Historical Continuity: Inspired by Laplanche’s earlier classic The Language of Psychoanalysis (with Pontalis).
  • Clarifying Laplanche: Laplanche is widely cited, mainly for terms like “enigmatic signifier,” but his general theory of seduction and broader concepts remain underexplored.
  • Aim: "The purpose was to build the foundation of a real scientific debate... to propose a common ground by defining the concepts of Laplanche in order to pursue the debate and maybe also to raise questions or contradiction or further developments in the theory." (Tessier, 06:23)

3. Tessier’s Relationship to Laplanche & Editorial Process (07:30–13:14)

• Personal Connection:

  • Tessier shares her academic journey—how Dominique Scarfone and Jacques André connected her with Laplanche, who later served as a thesis examiner.
  • Relationship was "mainly scientific," characterized by mutual respect.
  • Quote: "It was always very interesting to discuss with Laplanche. But our relations were mainly scientific." (Tessier, 09:26)

• Editorial Collaboration:

  • The Vocabulary was a collective output: "We decided on 47 entries... the main concepts of Laplanche." (Tessier, 11:18)
  • Contributors were international, often close to Laplanche, each producing one or more entries.

4. Central Laplanchean Concepts: Primacy of the Other, Sexual Unconscious, Translation (14:27–22:20)

• Contrasting Schools: Tessier’s training in object relations led her to Laplanche, who offered criticism of French/phallic-centric psychoanalysis and the relational-intersubjective school.
• Central Laplanchean Insights:
  • Sexuality as Resistance & Excess: Recalls Freud’s “the ego is not the master in its own house.” (17:31)
  • Infantile Sexuality: “...is a perverse sexuality, like Freud described. It’s essentially sadomasochistic, first masochistic and then sadistic... It comes from the sexual synthesis of the parents, which are unconscious.” (Tessier, 18:39)
  • Laplanche’s theory liberates sexuality from rigid family roles—the formation of the unconscious is rooted in interpersonal, intergenerational contacts and the enigmatic address of the other.
  • Translation: Psychoanalysis as a model “to reopen this process of translation, as Laplanche writes, and maybe we don’t never know anything, but to me it was a very appealing anthropological conception of transformation.” (Tessier, 20:47)

5. The ‘Message’ and Its Uniqueness in Laplanche (22:20–26:21)

• The ‘message’ in Laplanche is neither simply information nor purely linguistic—it is always addressed, establishing the primacy of the other.
• “A message is something, is a proof that the other is there. It’s the way you apprehend that you know for a fact that there is another without really understanding…” (Tessier, 23:00)
• The message also bridges the psyche-soma divide (“as somatic as psychic”).
• Laplanche’s framework is explicitly non-magical, non-mystical—a rationalist, historical model of the emergence of the unconscious.

6. Signifiers, Messages, and Semiotics vs. Linguistics (26:21–29:42)

• Early Laplanche was closer to Lacan, but later, he distances himself from a purely linguistic model; “Signifier became, in Laplanche theory, a synonym for message…” (Tessier, 27:17)
• Human beings experience the world as messages—not just language but posture, silence, gestures.
• The “enigmatic” quality of the message: “We know what we think we send, but how often is it that we tell people, I don’t feel like doing this? And the interpretation is very different from what we thought we conveyed.” (Tessier, 29:36)

7. Two Types of Unconscious: Repressed & Enclaved (29:42–31:20)

• Later in his theorizing, Laplanche distinguishes the repressed unconscious from the enclaved, to account for phenomena such as psychosis and psychosomatics.
• Some messages are “untranslatable and they get stuck somewhere and they don’t contribute to the formation of the ego. So this is... not the sexual unconscious.” (Tessier, 30:35)

8. Clinical Application: The Analyst’s Role (31:20–40:35)

• Hermeneutics in Analysis:

  • “The analysand is the interpreter, not the analyst.”
  • Analyst must “have a deep respect for his own unconscious.”
  • Interventions often serve ego-theorization; “Analysis for Laplanche is delinking. It’s de-translating.” (Tessier, 33:38)

• Linking/Delinking (Binding/Unbinding):

  • Linking is the work of ego, crystallizing affect and representations; Delinking is the function of the sexual unconscious, attacking those crystallizations. Both are at play and in tension throughout psychic life.

  “For Laplanche, the human conflict is the conflict between two forces. The forces of linking and of delinking. The extreme of linking is the defense mechanism... but at its extreme it can paralyze someone.” (Tessier, 38:53)

• On Analyst’s Intervention:

  • Laplanche’s perspective is marked by caution about analyst-centered techniques like countertransference—believing these belong more to psychotherapy than to psychoanalysis proper.

9. Psychic Reality, Materiality, and Repetition (48:22–52:22)

• Psychic Reality: A third order, irreducible to either material events or subjective fantasy, linked to the message and the other’s address.
• Central to Laplanche’s theory is the “materiality in the fantasy which is the address. It means the other is there attacking. That’s the material aspect.” (Tessier, 51:27)
• The sexual unconscious resists meaning, is “other,” and assaults ego efforts at narrativization and coherence.

10. Laplanche’s Meta-Promise: Freer (Re)translation (52:22–56:12)

• The goal is not ego strengthening or finding a singular meaning, but facilitating “translations which are more encompassing, more liberating in a way, freer translation…” (Tessier, 52:59)
• Laplanche frames transformation as the reorganization of internal conflict, rather than its elimination.

11. Narcissism, Culture, and Symbolization (56:51–65:49)

• On Narcissism: For Laplanche, narcissism is not primordial but secondary, linked to ego processes and their rigidity.
• Culture: The tools of linking and delinking are culturally variable, but the processes themselves are universal and anchored in interpersonal exchange.
• Narrativization of Self: “The ego for La Planche is a mise en récit, which means storytelling about yourself.” (Tessier, 61:48)
• Symbolization: Not fixed symbolism, but the continuous, personal capacity to link and delink affect and representation; symbolization is central to psychic health.

12. Crisis of Symbolization and Technology (63:46–66:03)

• Tessier expresses concern about modern trends, especially the “glorification” of artificial intelligence and the decline of interpretation:
  • “We are assisting to a glorification of… artificial intelligence... [but] If you feed a motor with a million impossible interpretation and it picks one, it’s not the same as create one.”
  • Worries that if human interpretation recedes, Laplanche’s models may lose relevance.

13. Laplanche and Klein – Nuances of Influence (66:12–72:27)

• Laplanche’s Relationship to Klein:
  • Deep respect (“the more prominent post-Freudian”), especially for the notion of the “part object.”
  • Critical differences: Klein sees “part objects” as a developmental stage giving way to whole objects; Laplanche sees the whole object (the other) as present from the start after primary repression.
  • Distances himself from Kleinian “constructivism” and certain clinical approaches, but acknowledges much indebtedness, especially in conceptualizing the internal world as one of attack and conflict.

14. The Concept of ‘Exigence’/Requirement (72:27–74:21)

• ‘Exigence’ as a guiding value for Laplanche—insistence on scientific rigor and philosophical seriousness, in contrast to postmodernist trends.

15. The Future of Laplanche Studies & Concluding Reflections (74:21–83:16)

• Tessier’s hopes for Laplanche scholarship:
  • Greater engagement with interpretation in today’s culture.
  • The need to clarify Laplanche’s distinctiveness amidst conflations with communication theory or relational/interpersonal psychoanalysis.
  • Importance of distinguishing his vocabulary and concepts in debate, not smoothing them over.
  • Desire to trace connections with theorists like Cassirer and to elaborate further on the anthropological basis for Laplanche’s primacy of interpretation.

Notable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

• On the Vocabulary’s Mission:

  “It’s very possible and legitimate to disagree with Laplanche’s position, but we have to discuss on the same basis. So the idea of the vocabulary was to propose a common ground by defining the concepts of Laplanche in order to pursue the debate…” (Tessier, 06:23)

• Defining the Message:

  “A message is something, is a proof that the other is there. It’s the way you apprehend that you know for a fact that there is another without really understanding about what the... other is telling you.” (Tessier, 23:00)

• On Narcissism:

  “For him, narcissism is secondary, it’s not originary... narcissism is about, yes, self-preservation, but sexualized in a binding form...” (Tessier, 57:09)

• On Psychoanalysis & Transformation:

  “...it wouldn’t be a bad way to say it, but I would insist more on a different equilibrium between the forces of linking and delinking. Laplanche has no harsh judgment... It’s a motor of transformation.” (Tessier, 52:59)

• On Interpretation & Crisis in Symbolization:

  “We are assisting to a glorification of... artificial intelligence... the loss of the importance of interpretation... If the human does not interpret... Will psychoanalysis still be relevant? Maybe, but not La Blanchie.” (Tessier, 65:32)

• On Laplanche & Klein:

  “There’s a difference... I think as a theorist they are very close in seeing this infant as someone which is overwhelmed by internal attacks. And this is very much like Laplanche.” (Tessier, 70:29)

Conclusion

Safer’s probing questions and Tessier’s precise, richly contextualized answers provide a rare window into both the content and the method of current Laplanche scholarship. This episode stands as an essential guide for any clinician, scholar, or student seeking a lucid entry into Laplanche’s complex and influential metapsychology, bridging historical genealogy, clinical relevance, and philosophical rigor.

Recommended for:

• Scholars and students of psychoanalysis, especially those engaging with metapsychology.
• Clinicians interested in theoretical frameworks beyond object relations and intersubjectivity.
• Readers looking for an authoritative, accessible guide to Laplanche’s conceptual innovations.

Resource Mentioned:
Le Vocabulaire de Laplanche (PUF, 2024) – A must-have reference for contemporary psychoanalytic inquiry.

End of Summary.