Jacques Lacan, answered from the texts and cited to the page.
A discourse that addresses the subject of the unconscious cannot be transparent to the ego that wants to understand it. The difficulty is not decoration; it is the condition of the address.1234
It's full, but entirely cryptographic speech, unknown to the subject as to its sense, even though he pronounces it with all his being, in everything he manifests, everything he evokes and has ineluctably realized down a certain path of completion and incompletion, if nothing in this order of oscillation called analysis intervenes.Seminar V, Formations of the Unconscious, pp. 454–455
Of course the ego is to be found at the rather impoverished point of synthesis to which the subject is reduced when he presents himself, but he is also something else, he also finds himself somewhere else, he comes from somewhere else, precisely from the point beyond the pleasure principle at which we can ask - what is it that is caught in this symboli'cpwel;>, in this fundamental phrase which insists beyond…Seminar II, The Ego in Freud's Theory, p. 209
You should read Oedipus at Colon us for the next seminar. There you'll discover that the final word of the relation of man to this discourse of which he is ignorant, is death. Indeed one must attain poetical expression in order to discover how intense can become the iden tification between this veiled preterite and death.as such, in its most horrible guise.Seminar II, The Ego in Freud's Theory, p. 210
Why not? This did not surprise Freud. He had long since anticipated this. We can point to a very early passage in one of his "Papers on Technique" in 334 Capital I and Little a which he says, let us take advantage of the opening up of the unconscious, because soon it will have found another trick.Seminar VIII, Transference, p. 345
The charge most often brought and the one on which his defenders are least unanimous — many accept the mathematical criticism and reject the conclusion drawn from it.