I recall a study calling Freud's/Lacan's diagnosis of Lanzer/Lorenz as obsessional into question. Something about Freud's own obsessionality and projection (why didn't he destroy his process notes for this case, like he did for the others?), narcissistic wish to fit data to theory, and the (non-)place of obsession in psychoanalysis and capitalism...
Source? Or did I dream this?
What are some critiques of the notion of ordinary psychoses? Thoughts and references welcome.
In the opposite direction from Freud, does the move from diagnostic structure to sinthome (or desire to jouissance, signifier to letter, etc) risk resubstantializing the subject? Witness the reintroduction of the body, affect, autism, even if only at first on a plane of consistency. Is it the trade-off?
Where do rims ('bords'/boundaries) come from? Are they a given?
Relatedly, how do supposed autistic subjects come to foreclose or repudiate them (and reconstruct them), generally speaking?
Is there a systematic or at least sustained comparative analysis of different versions/translations of the seminars? Everything I've come across seems more piecemeal & gossipy (looking at you, Roudinesco). I guess we may never know about Ecrits.