georges didi huberman, confronti... - lensbased.net

296 Notes156. Ibid., 80–88. See also Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation . . . , 262–73 (‘‘GeneralCharacter of Transcendental Subjectivity as The Original Dimension of Synthetic APriori Knowledge’’).157. Ibid., 27–77.158. Ibid., 292: ‘‘Kant succumbs to the external schema of the division of logic.’’ Seealso 140, 150–51, 196, 291–93.159. Ibid., 216 [translation altered].Chapter 41. In accordance with a usage of the word ‘‘real’’ referenced to the notion of tuché (encounter) in Jacques Lacan, The Seminar. Book, xi: The Four Fundamental Concepts ofPsycho-analysis, trans. Alan Sheridan (New York: W. W. Norton, 1977), 53–55.2. Erwin Panofsky, ‘‘The History of Art as a Humanistic Discipline,’’ in Meaning, 17.3. Panofsky, ‘‘Das Problem des Stils in der Bildenden Kunst’’ (1915), in Aufsätze, 22. Seeabove, page 000.4. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Eye and Mind, trans. Carleton Dallery, in Merleau-Ponty,The Primacy of Perception (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1964), 164 [translationaltered].5. See Umberto Eco, The Open Work, trans. Anna Cancogni (Cambridge, Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press, 1989), 1–23.6. Interestingly, a recent book by J. Wirth, L’Image médiévale: Naissance et développement(vie–xve siècle) (Paris: Kliencksieck, 1989), 47–107, shows how the question of images wasrooted in the ‘‘medieval logical universe.’’ But likewise its limit, when he suggests a directinferential relationship from the latter to the former.7. ‘‘Flectere si nequeo Superos/Acheronta movebo,’’ citation from Virgil used by Freud asthe epigraph to The Interpretation of Dreams (1900). The citation also figures in the body ofthe text, Interpretation, 608. See the beautiful commentary by Jean Starobinski, ‘‘Acherontamovebo,’’ L’Écrit du temps 11 (1986): 3–14.8. Interpretation, 608. This phrase directly follows the two lines from Virgil.9. It could be objected that such things might occur—but only as the exceptionalsymptom of some catastrophe, flood, or massacre of innocents . . .10. Interpretation, 277 [translation altered].11. In other words, like the ‘‘functional unity’’ of cognition answering to a ‘‘fundamentalpostulate of unity’’ between objects, but that the objects themselves are incapable ofmanifesting. See PSF 1:76–78.12. Interpretation, 281 [translation altered; cf. Crick, 214].13. There is a path to be laid out between the previous Freud citation and this notedating from August 2, 1939, near the end of his life: ‘‘Space might be a projective extensionof the psychic apparatus. Probably no other derivation. Instead of the a priori conditionsof the psychic apparatus according to Kant. Psyche is extended; knows nothing of this.’’SE 23, p.300 [translation altered]. Thinking the enigma of this ‘‘extension’’ is doubtless oneof the most arduous tasks of Freudian metapsychology. This is evidenced, for example, byLacan’s protracted attempt to pass from topography to topology. See also the recent workof P. Fédida, summarized in ‘‘Théorie des lieux,’’ Psychanalyse à l’université 14, no. 53 (1989):3–14; and no. 56, 3–18.14. Interpretation, 281.15. Ibid., 305.