Psychoanalytic clinic from suggestion to vagueness. Página Literal #2. (Costa Rica, 2004)
Psychoanalytic clinic? Yes, with a question mark. This oxymoron has led to a wide debate that resides in a particular point in history, in which psychoanalysis was rejected in various latitudes. Therefore, this term served as a “camouflage” elaborated by schools in order to participate in the political matrix of their time. Under the reading and translation of the paper by Guy Le Gaufey, Is the analyst a clinician? This article shows the path made by this oxymoron in Costa Rica, as well as pointing to the paradoxes and claims created by this syntagma, so frequently linked to medical semiology. Thereby leaning to make a displacement from this positive semiology, which pretends to typecast the signs of a subject into general structures of sense, guaranteeing universality and coherence. Thus, we bet for a critic review -handed by an essential triad: case-to-case singularity, transference and the subject supposed to know- of this comfortable term that some analysts have used in order to validate their clinic.