Lacan was nourished by analysts of all kinds. He found the true meaning in every discourse, whether pathological, philosophical, or primarily Freudian. He read Freud and his bibliographic references, like Plotinus read Plato. So his project is not so revolutionary. It is rooted in the history of philosophy. Only, being intelligent, he understands that behind every philosophy, there is a religion that he secularizes, and behind every religion, there is a practice of its secrets. Religious doctrines differ in their experiences of their mysteries. And philosophies differ in the secularization of their religions. And from this perspective, free association is a kind of worldly secret, a way of addressing the surplus and the unspoken of language. In the daily practice of this secret experience, which is the session, Lacan wanted the psychoanalyst to be a rag in the discourse of the other. 

Lacanians, to the extent that they are dominated by the unbearable fact of being a rag in the discourse of the other, seek powers, mainly in the accuracy of rendering Lacanian writing. We knew all this when we attempted the translation. It is not a booklet for a quick summary of his thought. It has no order. It is associative and an attempt to offer something to the secret reader through the written text, which proportionally has something of the establishment of the session. Meteoric fragments of a thought that in the unfolding of the seminars, with its baroque language, once became recognizable remnants even as paradoxes. We do not demand from psychoanalysts the rendering of the text, on the contrary, we turn towards their readers who will want to become adequate. An open work that brings news from the most extreme borders of language. That is, at the borders with poetic expression.