Yes, we can say that Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus primarily deal with psychosis, while Lacan’s teachings are primarily concerned with neurosis, but this distinction needs to be nuanced and contextualized. Let’s break this down:
1. Lacan’s Focus on Neurosis
• The Centrality of the Oedipus Complex:
• Lacan’s psychoanalysis, especially in its early and middle periods, is rooted in the Oedipal structure as a way of understanding the development of subjectivity and the unconscious. For Lacan, the neurotic subject (the subject caught in symbolic and imaginary conflicts) embodies the tension between desire and the Law of the Father.
• Neurosis, in Lacanian terms, reflects the subject’s struggle with repression, guilt, and unfulfilled desire within the framework of the Symbolic order.
• Lacan and Neurosis as Normative:
• Lacan treats neurosis as the “normative” psychic structure of modern individuals, caught in linguistic, symbolic, and cultural networks. Most of his teachings, such as the mirror stage, the Name-of-the-Father, and the symbolic castration, are oriented toward understanding and treating neurotic conflicts.
• Psychosis in Lacan:
• Lacan addresses psychosis (notably in his seminar on The Psychoses), but it remains less central to his overall framework. Psychosis is characterized by a foreclosure of the Name-of-the-Father, meaning the psychotic subject cannot access the stabilizing effects of the Symbolic order. This results in delusions and hallucinatory phenomena tied to the Real.
2. Deleuze and Guattari’s Focus on Psychosis
• Breaking from the Oedipal Framework:
• In Anti-Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus, Deleuze and Guattari explicitly critique psychoanalysis, particularly its fixation on the Oedipus complex and its normative treatment of neurosis.
• They argue that psychoanalysis overcodes subjectivity by forcing the messy, productive flows of desire into the restrictive framework of Oedipal triangulations (mommy-daddy-me).
• Schizophrenia as a Model for Freedom:
• Deleuze and Guattari embrace schizophrenia (a psychotic condition) as a metaphor for the deterritorialization of desire—the liberation of desire from the repressive forces of the Oedipal system, capitalism, and societal norms.
• They do not romanticize actual psychosis but use schizophrenia as a conceptual tool to think about creativity, openness, and escape from fixed structures.
• Psychosis as Revolutionary Potential:
• Psychosis, for Deleuze and Guattari, represents a radical break from the Symbolic order and an opening to new possibilities. The schizophrenic subject deterritorializes coded systems, such as capitalism and familial structures, offering lines of flight that disrupt normative reality.
3. Psychosis vs. Neurosis: Ontological and Political Implications
• Neurosis (Lacan):
• Lacan’s focus on neurosis reflects a concern with maintaining the subject within the Symbolic order, where meaning, law, and language structure desire and relationships.
• Neurosis, though filled with conflict and repression, remains tethered to the norms and stability of the Symbolic order.
• Psychosis (Deleuze and Guattari):
• Deleuze and Guattari’s exploration of psychosis (particularly schizophrenia) is less about clinical treatment and more about philosophical and political liberation.
• They see psychosis as a challenge to the Symbolic order, highlighting its arbitrariness and rigidity. Psychotic breaks are deterritorializing movements that reveal the underlying flows and multiplicities obscured by normative structures.
4. Points of Overlap and Divergence
• Focus of Study:
• Lacan: Concerned with understanding and resolving the conflicts of neurotic subjects caught in the Oedipal structure and the Symbolic order.
• Deleuze and Guattari: Focused on psychosis, particularly schizophrenia, as a model for deconstructing repression and opening up new ways of thinking about desire, society, and subjectivity.
• Relation to the Symbolic Order:
• Lacan emphasizes the necessity of the Symbolic order for subject formation and stability, viewing its breakdown (as in psychosis) as catastrophic.
• Deleuze and Guattari critique the Symbolic order as repressive, using psychosis conceptually to explore the liberation of desire from its constraints.
• Therapeutic vs. Philosophical Goals:
• Lacan is primarily a clinician, developing his theories to treat neurosis and other psychic structures.
• Deleuze and Guattari are philosophers, using psychosis as a metaphor to critique psychoanalysis, capitalism, and repressive social structures.
5. Limitations of the Comparison
• While it’s tempting to frame this distinction as Lacan = neurosis and Deleuze/Guattari = psychosis, it’s important to avoid oversimplification:
• Lacan’s Work on Psychosis: Lacan did address psychosis in depth, particularly through concepts like foreclosure and the Real. However, psychosis was not central to his broader teaching, which primarily engaged with neurosis as the “normative” psychic structure.
• Deleuze and Guattari’s Engagement with Neurosis: While they critique neurosis as a product of Oedipal repression, their exploration of deterritorialization and assemblages implicitly addresses the neurotic subject’s potential for transformation.
6. Broader Implications
• Lacan and Social Norms:
• Lacan’s focus on neurosis reflects his interest in how subjects navigate and are shaped by social norms, language, and symbolic law. His teachings are primarily concerned with how individuals can live within the constraints of the Symbolic order while confronting their desires.
• Deleuze and Guattari and Revolution:
• Deleuze and Guattari’s focus on psychosis ties to their broader political project of deterritorialization—breaking free from the rigid systems (capitalism, psychoanalysis, the State) that structure desire and subjectivity.
Conclusion
We can reasonably say that Lacan’s teachings primarily address neurosis, focusing on the subject’s entrapment within the Symbolic order and the resolution of neurotic conflicts. In contrast, Anti-Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus use psychosis (particularly schizophrenia) as a conceptual framework for exploring deterritorialization, creativity, and revolutionary potential. This distinction reflects their differing goals: Lacan as a clinician working within psychoanalysis, and Deleuze and Guattari as philosophers critiquing and expanding its boundaries.
