The paternal function is tied to an existence that supposes sexuated articulation.“He (a father) can be a model for the function only by realising in it a type of paternal perversion, that is to say, that the cause is a woman whom he acquired in order to give her children, of whom, whether he wants to or not, he takes paternal care”. This surprising recourse to the “perversion” in order to save the subject from psychosis is the fecund way, (a very appropriate way of saying it in this case), for the Name-of-the-Father to be recomposed in a world where the exception is no longer transcendent. It is tangled everywhere. This recourse definitely implies that we renounce the myth of the father of the horde. The “useful” Name-of-the-Father is not the father of the “all”. He needs a regulating fiction in order to exist. The “a la carte” recomposition in the bric-a-brac of tradition, or any other “formalist” conception, requires flesh to subsist. Concerning this, I refer to the developments of J.-A, Miller in Le Neveu de Lacan. There is no need to find its foundation in a hypothetical psychosomatic basis, or to wager everything on the experience of parenting, strictly pragmatic.
Lacan gives a precise foundation to this flesh along a double principle. In the existence of a cause of desire ; and in the love which it may authorize. The consequence is to be read in the following logical sense: he who leads from the drive to love and not the reverse.
Extract from » How to recompose the Names-of-the-Father » (Eric Laurent) http://2doc.net/591oy // Translated from: “Comment recomposer les Noms-du-Père?” Élucidation nº 8/9, Paris, Verdier, 2004.