>lol!
>you're right bobo, that is pretty much my objection; you're right too about
>there being other ways to enter the symbolic: your teacher, your boss, a
>policeman... they can all "play" oedipus for you... it doesn't have to be
>your father!!!!
>
>seriously - i don't understand how or why you want to divide oedipus from
>the family. how exactly can oedipus not be familial? he marries his
>_mother_ !! that is a rather crucial detail, it seems to me. why do you
>want to keep oedipus as the figure of desire? an oedipus who no longer
>desires his _mother_ but a women who just happened to be passing? who
>doesn't usurp his father but just the man who he saw asking her the time??
>how is this still oedipus?? -- unless, of course, we already _know_ it's
>always always oedipus....
i mean that the transmission of oedipus isn't always familial, but oedipus
'starts out' in the family. the first castration, the phallic injunction
ending the mirror-stage is pretty much limited to the family, but later on
there's a diversity of oedipalization routes. for example, the father might
let his child identify with the phallus as much as he wants, but the
neighboorhood bully might not...
:) bobo
>;-)
>
> > Q: Why would you want to [metaphorize the phallus/ castration]?
> > A: Because Freud was wrong?
> >
>
>aha!
>
>so "sometimes... a cigar _is_ just a cigar..." ?
>
>dan
>
>http://on.to/machine
>http://switch.to/capital
>
>"The immediate thought was too dreadful to
>articulate: August had been right and, for all
>we knew, horrific microbes were right now
>invading our every pore" - EIGHTBALL #20
>
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com