The author transmits the trajectory of desire in Gide. All his life, he has written, like a necessity, relentlessly, to share with his readers what he has done with his singularity. The place of desire taken by the letter allows to think that he was able to “demortify” a mortified desire to make it alive. His life is an vibrant testimony of it.

In the light of the work of psychoanalyst Pierre Bruno What is Dreaming ?, published in 2017, Louis Sciara tackles the question of dreams from a theoretical and clinical point of view. In particular, he puts to work the theses of the author of the book : the dream is what separates the dreamer from knowledge from the Other ; the distinction and the knotting between fantasy and desire. In his turn, in the handling of the treatment, over the course of the transference, he poses questions which touch on knowledge and truth in interpretation, those which testify, on a case-by-case basis, to a Real at stake, that specific to the structure of the analysand, in its enunciation of the dream and in its associations.

The graph is a sketch of the structure in movement showing how from an analysis is developed the constitutive links between the ethical status of the subject with the Other and his real hole, location of the emergence of the primordial jouissance and receiver of the object cause of desire dressed with its phallic reflections. The desire of the analyst can be pivotal for the subject to be led to choose the law of desire rather than the imperative of jouissance.

Taking into account the real of jouissance of the body and of the scopic dimension of this body is fundamental in sexuation. The focus of jouissance on the external organ, which gives the impetus to the phallic jouissance, can be the choice of the subjects of both sexes, even if this focus appears to be more frequent in men, more prompt to halt at the enjoyment of the nomination of their organ. This choice comes in opposition to receiving the jouissance Other which is made accessible by the affirmation of loss to the detriment of the strategy of the lack, the latter aimed at masking the hole of the object “a”.

Art could take precedence over the truth of the symptom, escaping the claim that truth can be told in full. With this in mind, is there an art of dreaming? To answer this question, the relationship between poetry and dreams is explored.

Starting from one of Freud’s dreams, literally one word “Norekdal”, and from the dreamer’s associations, Grinstein, after concluding the crossing between the two Ibsen’s plays to which this dream refers – A Doll’s House (Nora) and The Duck (Ekdal) – that have in common to raise the question of “the truths that have to be told (or not)”, attempts an interpretation. The motive of the dream would be linked to Freud’s concerns about receiving psychoanalytical truths and could be encompassed in this question “wouldn’t it be preferable to let people cling to the vital illusion, rather than opening up their eyes on an unbearable truth ?”