What do you think?
Rate this book
Lo Que Lacan Dijo de Las Mujeres
Brand New. Ship worldwide
Paperback
First published March 1, 2003
18 people are currently reading
267 people want to read
About the author
Colette Soler
65 books24 followersColette Soler is a psychoanalyst trained by Jacques Lacan, and a founding member of the School of Psychoanalysis of the Forums of the Lacanian Field.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
December 18, 2016
Na primeira parte Che Vuoi? a autora delineia os aspectos do que difere Lacan e Freud em relação às mulheres, o gozo fálico e Outro.
Na segunda parte, Clínica Diferencial, a autora aborda as diferenças entre histeria e feminilidade, o masoquismo e a mulher e a depressão e o feminino.
Na terceira parte a temática é sobre a mãe, como se dá no inconsciente, a angústia da mesma e a análise de caso sobre a Piggle de Winnicott (este que me fez intuir o quão psicanalítico e o filme Babadook).
Na quarta parte, Mulheres na Civilização, a autora trata da histérica na época da ciência, as diferenças da mulher para Balzac e Freud, as éticas sexuadas que mostram como para Freud anatomia é o destino e para Lacan as pessoas tem escolha, além do sentido do casamento na contemporaneidade.
Na quinta parte, Maldição, Soler define os tipos de amor através dos tempos e delimita a mulher sintoma e o homem-devastação.
Na sexta e última parte, A Análise, a autora perpassa o amor de transferência e as diferenças entre o homem com maior capacidade de ser "massificável", de se render a um líder e a mulher que tende a ser mais independente.
O livro encerra com um anexo sobre a sexuação lacaniana.
Na segunda parte, Clínica Diferencial, a autora aborda as diferenças entre histeria e feminilidade, o masoquismo e a mulher e a depressão e o feminino.
Na terceira parte a temática é sobre a mãe, como se dá no inconsciente, a angústia da mesma e a análise de caso sobre a Piggle de Winnicott (este que me fez intuir o quão psicanalítico e o filme Babadook).
Na quarta parte, Mulheres na Civilização, a autora trata da histérica na época da ciência, as diferenças da mulher para Balzac e Freud, as éticas sexuadas que mostram como para Freud anatomia é o destino e para Lacan as pessoas tem escolha, além do sentido do casamento na contemporaneidade.
Na quinta parte, Maldição, Soler define os tipos de amor através dos tempos e delimita a mulher sintoma e o homem-devastação.
Na sexta e última parte, A Análise, a autora perpassa o amor de transferência e as diferenças entre o homem com maior capacidade de ser "massificável", de se render a um líder e a mulher que tende a ser mais independente.
O livro encerra com um anexo sobre a sexuação lacaniana.
October 21, 2022
I found it quite fascinating. In reading a couple of novels, Kerninon's "Liv Maria", and Violaine Huissman's "Fugitive parce que reine", I found a lot of validation in Lacanian ideas of feminine jouissance... I still have more to explore, I think reading Encore and L'Etourdit will be something I need to do, and also explore more about the logic of sexuation.
I am also wondering, and I think Soler is in agreement here on some level, that the feminine position is not strictly feminine. That the phallic figure is actually a dupe, just like, to use rather crude examples Trump or Putin are impotent figures who need to hold up the idea of having the phallus. However, I think that men who are closer to the unconscious impossibility of the sexual relation, and the unavoidable fact of castration, may also share "feminine jouissance" to say. Males and females exist, but "la femme n'ex-siste pas" is true, because gender is a choice? We are always debating what it means to be a real man, or a real woman, I think even the trans community may be plagued with this question. For the issue is, I don't know what it means to be a man, even though I happen to be one... need to do more reading.
Excellent book.
I am also wondering, and I think Soler is in agreement here on some level, that the feminine position is not strictly feminine. That the phallic figure is actually a dupe, just like, to use rather crude examples Trump or Putin are impotent figures who need to hold up the idea of having the phallus. However, I think that men who are closer to the unconscious impossibility of the sexual relation, and the unavoidable fact of castration, may also share "feminine jouissance" to say. Males and females exist, but "la femme n'ex-siste pas" is true, because gender is a choice? We are always debating what it means to be a real man, or a real woman, I think even the trans community may be plagued with this question. For the issue is, I don't know what it means to be a man, even though I happen to be one... need to do more reading.
Excellent book.
July 18, 2018
For a book with such an enticing title, I was enormously disappointed. How could it go so wrong? This book, after all, even won an academic award. Surely it should have more merit than this. Dutifully, I went looking for it, felt almost guilty for not finding it - and only acknowledged just how weak this book is when I saw someone else's negative review on Amazon.
The first problem with this book is that it doesn't really go anywhere. The whole thing, after all, was pieced together out of essays and lectures that Soler assembled in the 1990s, and so the whole enterprise feels like an opportunistic assemblage that gathers together texts that have only a family resemblance.
The second problem with this book is the mindset of its author, Colette Soler. In the last few days I have come across several more of her pieces in the course of my Lacanian research, and each time I have been struck by the utter blandness of her pronouncements. Soler belongs to the Jacques-Alain Miller school of Lacanian thought, which produces a dull orthodoxy that is visible in the similar work of Bruce Fink, Ellie Ragland, Stuart Scheidermann, Éric Laurent, and many other such epigones.
If you really want to know what Lacan said about women, bypass this book and read On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge: The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book XX: Encore instead. After that, you can go on to read the rich vein of feminist criticism of Lacan's views on women, from Gallop to Grosz, which Soler dutifully ignores.
The first problem with this book is that it doesn't really go anywhere. The whole thing, after all, was pieced together out of essays and lectures that Soler assembled in the 1990s, and so the whole enterprise feels like an opportunistic assemblage that gathers together texts that have only a family resemblance.
The second problem with this book is the mindset of its author, Colette Soler. In the last few days I have come across several more of her pieces in the course of my Lacanian research, and each time I have been struck by the utter blandness of her pronouncements. Soler belongs to the Jacques-Alain Miller school of Lacanian thought, which produces a dull orthodoxy that is visible in the similar work of Bruce Fink, Ellie Ragland, Stuart Scheidermann, Éric Laurent, and many other such epigones.
If you really want to know what Lacan said about women, bypass this book and read On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge: The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book XX: Encore instead. After that, you can go on to read the rich vein of feminist criticism of Lacan's views on women, from Gallop to Grosz, which Soler dutifully ignores.
February 4, 2025
Me costó. Me encantó. Me hechizó.
Es un libro que desconozco si así le puso la autora o si fue el título que le termino eligiendo alguna editorial. Lejos está de ser lo que Lacan dijo de las mujeres. Me gustaría más, si hubiera que usar algo similar, "Lo que Lacan dijo y que colette Soler transmitió".
Me deja muchísimo. Mucho respecto del amor, de la sexualidad, del encuentro con el otro y de la mujer como Otra. Quizá me costó el final. Por el cansancio de tanta repetición pero me gustaría releer el final (Y todo el libro) en unos años.
Muchísimas frases remarcadas. Palabras que resuenan. Me quedo con algo que resonó en cuanto a la elección de objeto. Objeto de amor.
"No puedo decirte lo que eres para mí... pero me muestras lo que soy. ¡Gracias"
Es un libro que desconozco si así le puso la autora o si fue el título que le termino eligiendo alguna editorial. Lejos está de ser lo que Lacan dijo de las mujeres. Me gustaría más, si hubiera que usar algo similar, "Lo que Lacan dijo y que colette Soler transmitió".
Me deja muchísimo. Mucho respecto del amor, de la sexualidad, del encuentro con el otro y de la mujer como Otra. Quizá me costó el final. Por el cansancio de tanta repetición pero me gustaría releer el final (Y todo el libro) en unos años.
Muchísimas frases remarcadas. Palabras que resuenan. Me quedo con algo que resonó en cuanto a la elección de objeto. Objeto de amor.
"No puedo decirte lo que eres para mí... pero me muestras lo que soy. ¡Gracias"
February 3, 2024
Señor (Idk French. Pardon me.) Freud was not an easy guy to read. Lacan interpreted everything from Freud and made it a mathematical mess with its Hamiltonian topology and signifiers and signifieds. Ugh, giving me an headache just thinking about it. And I thought (Ha! Silly me!) an interpretation of Lacan will be easy to read. Hang me now. I barely came out of this alive.
April 1, 2014
Lacan had quite about to say about women.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews