Alain Badiou. What Is Love. Sexuality and Desire. 2008. 2/12

[890buddha]

it must be annoying for the cameraman, because he keeps standing up

[Krelianx]

This is not Badiou's clearest lecture, nor his better written one. What is this talk of a 'real two' which is neither summation nor fusion? What is this supposed to mean? Maybe: the enquiry of the truth procedure that love begins creates a common enquiry which is immanently the production of the two but which is not merely the summation of the two subjects (the discourse produced is not the conjunction of the two) nor a fusion of both positions into one. But a singular position which...

[Krelianx]

I am eagerly awaiting the rest of this lecture. I have some problems still understanding the non-existence of a sexual rapport. I understand the analogy Badiou proposes, but I do not see why the sexual rapport does not exist. I think it has to do with the non-existence of a third term (desire) which is common to both; you only have the assymetrical masculine and femenine sexual desires, but no third desire which 'connects' the two. But I need to understand Lacan's formulas of sexuation first.