The work proposal put forward by PIPOL 10 points out at least three terms that need to be worked on from the outset: parenthood, family and filiation. These terms are to be distinguished and articulated. These three signifiers correspond to different registers which, in the experience of the parlêtre, are knotted together, always in a singular way. Procreation, the system of alliances and inheritance correspond point by point with each one of them.
The mystery that PIPOL 10 will interrogate, as we read in Dominique Holvoet’s presentation, is that «the living being that results (from procreation) will always bear the imprint of the sign that saw it born as a speaking body, [the] enigma of its coming into the world, [the] mystery of the union of the speech and body». That is to say, it is a question of the origin and not the beginning, as it is worked out by François Ansermet.
In this third session of the preparatory work, we will focus on the question of filiation. Filiation is a term that designates the origin of children and the legal and non-legal consequences that derive from it. Its origin is of late Latin and according to various definitions, we can conclude that it has to do both with inheritance and the act. Consequently, the syntagm ‘clinic of filiations’ condenses the act and the transmission, placing us directly on the consequences for the parlêtre regarding the question of its existence. In this sense, the question of filiation becomes relevant for us, and it must be said that it is only possible to approach it through cases. Filiation is not a concept.
In his re-reading of Family Complexes in 1969, Lacan gives the conjugal family the «function of residue» which «emphasises what is irreducible in a transmission – which is of another order than that of life according to the satisfaction of needs».1 The clinic of filiations could then be inscribed in this formulation since, from the function of residue, Lacan goes on to say, derive desire as well as the law and the symptom.
What is inscribed in the field of filiations? Filiation does not necessarily correspond to the natural, although it may include the biological relationship. Therefore, filiation refers precisely to a position that includes the subjective element of recognition. As it is a position, it is situated along the lines of the sexual relationship that does not exist, since it is a matter of finding a solution to what there is not. In other words, it is because Achilles will never catch up with the tortoise that a filial relationship can be named “you are…”.
Lacan says that «It is in relation to the para-being that we must articulate what makes up for (supplée au) the sexual relationship qua nonexistent», that he also calls the «being beside». In this case, we could say, the para-being loved, since it is also love that makes up for the sexual relation that does not exist. So, the clinic of filiations is considered a way of naming, to which must be added the consequent marks that this naming has produced in the parlêtre.
The absence of paternal transmission, in some cases, may have precipitated the finding of a solution through substitution. In another case, it may be a matter of identification with another who holds a significance in the framework of his origin. From this, we could see the different variations, in short, unclassifiable, and therefore, belonging to the logic of the one by one.
Today, the question of filiation is intertwined with the discourse of science, opening up new ways of realisation. However, nothing of this provides the formula for the sexual relationship that does not exist. The new collages we are witnessing give an account of new failures, since the real remains a hole, as it always depends on the Unerkannt.
Translation: Maria Amparo Tomás Garcia
Photography: ©Dubuisson Hughes : www.hughesdubuisson.be
 Lacan, J., Note on the child (1969), The Lacanian Review, n. 4.
 Lacan, J., Encore, Seminar XX, W.W. Norton, New York, 1999, p. 45.
 Solano, Esthela, Bricolages familiaux, La Cause freudienne N°72.