by Admin General | Jul 4, 2026
When: Saturday 4th July 2026
Time: 3:30pm to 5:30pm
Where: K. T. Paul Hall, 41 Fitzroy Square, London WIT 6AQ
***************
Michaela Chamberlain will deliver a lecture based on a chapter of her new book, On Resisting Women.
Michaela Chamberlain trained at The Bowlby Centre and studied in the Psychoanalysis Unit at UCL. Shortly after qualifying at The Bowlby Centre in 2016, she started teaching Freud and attachment theory and became chair of The Bowlby Centre. She worked as an honorary psychotherapist in two NHS trusts for several years. She has presented clinical papers at public forums, lectures internationally, and has been published in various journals. She is the author of Misogyny in Psychoanalysis (2022) and On Resisting Women (2026).
***************
Few concepts in psychoanalysis have been as influential in shaping cultural understandings of motherhood as the “good enough mother.” Introduced by one of the Fathers of psychoanalysis, Donald Winnicott, the concept offered a seemingly compassionate alternative to impossible ideals of maternal perfection. Yet embedded within psychoanalytic accounts of motherhood is a more troubling history: one in which mothers have been positioned as the primary site of blame, scrutiny, and therapeutic intervention.
This paper revisits Winnicott’s celebrated 1947 paper, Hate in the Counter-Transference, alongside Amanda Montei’s contemporary memoir Touched Out: Motherhood, Misogyny, Consent and Control. Winnicott’s essay is perhaps best remembered for its provocative acknowledgement that mothers hate their babies for many reasons, a claim that sought to normalise maternal ambivalence. Montei, writing nearly eighty years later, gives language to a different but related experience: being “touched out” a phrase that went viral because it articulated something many mothers recognised immediately but had rarely seen acknowledged.
We’ll be talking about mothers being ’touched out’, why psychoanalytic papers make therapists want to ‘tap out’ and if like JB Pontalis did, we should all be avoiding psychoanalytic conferences.
***************
This will be an IN-PERSON event only.
by Admin General | Jun 14, 2026
When: Sunday 14th June 2026
Time: 11:00am to 1:30pm
Where: Swedenborg House
***************
Lacan and Wittgenstein
Ben Hooson will lead a workshop on Jacques Lacan and Ludwig Wittgenstein, focusing on what Lacan said about the philosopher at a Seminar session in 1970 (a surviving audio recording gives us his exact words). Based on a close analysis of Wittgenstein’s best-known work, the Tractatus, Lacan took the philosopher to be “fiercely psychotic”. Remembering Freud’s comment (in his study of Judge Schreber’s memoirs), that psychotic writing offers an “endopsychic perception” of psychoanalytic theory, and remembering that Lacan’s understanding of psychoanalysis sprang from his early work with psychotic patients, the brief discussion of Wittgenstein in the Seminar gives precious insight into Lacan’s own thinking.
Abstract:
In the Seminar session of 21st January 1970, Lacan makes a sweeping statement. He says that what philosophers in the western tradition, from Plato and Aristotle to Descartes, Kant and Heidegger, want to do is to save truth: “Ils veulent sauver la vérité.”
He then says:
“This drew one of them, Wittgenstein, very far in order to refuse to end up at this: that by making it [truth] the rule and the foundation of knowledge, there is nothing left to say, nothing, at least, that concerns it [truth] as such, so as to avoid this rock – this rock, where, for sure, the author has one affinity with the position of the analyst, namely, that he eliminates himself completely from his discourse.”
The French text of the Seminar, published in 1991, is not faithful to what Lacan said in the passage above (and in several other places). Translated into English, the text says:
“This drew one of them, Wittgenstein, very far; as far as to end up at this: that by making it [truth] the rule and the foundation…”
Consequently, we lose Lacan’s point that Wittgenstein went very far in order to refuse (not just to ascertain or maybe even to accept) a situation where, by making truth into “the rule and the foundation of knowledge”, we end up with “nothing left to say”.
When we re-instate what Lacan actually said, Wittgenstein’s far travelling (Lacan means his whole philosophy, from the Tractatus to the Philosophical Investigations) would be an attempt to accommodate the possibility of saying things that “concern truth as such” – a refusal to accept that it is impossible to do so.
Why, though, might it ever be impossible to do so? Because of the threat posed by “this rock”? What rock? Lacan does not explain.
We naturally think of a rock in the sea, on which a boat can be wrecked, and that may be a connotation that Lacan intended. But his principal meaning is different. The semantic field of “roc” in French also covers what in English we call “bedrock” and Lacan had used the French word many times in earlier years when citing a Freudian metaphor: near the end of Analysis Terminable and Interminable Freud refers to the fear of castration as “bedrock”, meaning that this fear is something that psychoanalysis, in its work with neurotic subjects, is unable to break through and go beyond.
Lacan was in no doubt that Wittgenstein’s structure, judged by his philosophical writings, was not that of neurosis, but of fierce psychosis (“une férocité psychotique”). The attitude to castration is, for Lacan, the key difference between neurosis and psychosis. The neurotic represses castration; the psychotic forecloses it. Foreclosure is a more radical rejection than repression. But psychotic illness and – Lacan contends – the philosophy of Wittgenstein show that (the fear of) castration is never absent from the psychotic mind.
Why foreclosure entails a difficulty with truth; why truth, understood in the relevant way, has to do with signifiers; and why the psychotic’s attitude to castration has an affinity with the position of the analyst (Lacan’s claim in the quote above): these issues can be clarified by looking in detail at some key moments in Wittgenstein’s writings and what Lacan has to say about them.
***************
NO REFUNDS AVAILABLE
This event WILL NOT BE recorded and is a LIVE EVENT only.
by Admin General | Apr 20, 2026
The Site for Contemporary Psychoanalysis’s French Psychoanalysis in Translation seminar series responds to the steady increase in interest in French psychoanalysis in translation over recent years. English readers are now much better situated to appreciate the breadth and depth of French psychoanalytic thinking thanks to the continued efforts of publishers and translators to bring more classic and contemporary texts to an Anglophone audience. In response to this, the Site is inviting translators to discuss their work and that of the psychoanalytic authors whose texts they have translated.
The third seminar in the series will focus on Ben Hooson’s recent retranslation of Jacques Lacan‘s 1961-9162 seminar on Identification. Ben Hosoon will be in conversation with Site trainee Claudia Lapping, introducing the main themes of Seminar IX, discussing the politics of translation around Lacan’s work and examining some of the challenges of rendering Lacan’s ideas into English.
______________
Please Note: This event is going to be recorded, and the recording will be made available to attendees for FREE.
