This paper suggets a new appproach of the problem of the psychological status of some kinds of epileptic fits in chidhood and adolecence as linked with some trauma tic situations, in terms of the traditional Freudian interpretation of Dostoievski and parricide. It is in terms of an incorporative defence of a melancholic nature that one may stress the strictly psychosomatic dimension of the fit. Such a fit enables a “ suject ” to surge (in fact, quite desubjecticized) possessed by the “ obscene and creul ” superego as mentioned by Lacan. Such a fit seems to be an impossible task of mourning,so long as in its drive like violence it “ recaptures ” the trauma’s libidinal loading by repeating it on a kind of “ infernal ” way (Freud). The thera peutic perspectives underlying such a paradoxical function of trauma go further beyong the clinical and theoretical dialogue open between Freud and Firenczi
Around the logic of a retrospective and prospective time of the analytic cure, the author questions the processus of reminiscence, and of past and non predictive future. One should not attribute the logic of a retrospective temporality to a logic of the unconscious. Sucession never meant consecutiveness or causality. The unconscious, according to Freud, is nothing but the terms, i.e. the thing aura, in other words, what Freud called à “ thing (re) presentation ”. Language cannot be reduced to signs or symbols. No language can say what and who I am. There is a founding and therapeutic grounding breach between the several mecanings and the “ saying ”. Four clinical examples account for it. Indeed symptomatology compels one to believe in some cause and also causes the cause (where psychoanalysis embezzles itself whithin what it termed psychological causality).