At the beginning of an analysis, the subject is confronted with a kind of dependence towards the analyst ; dependence within love of transference is in a central position. The turn which takes place in the process brings to the subject the understanding that the knowledge supposed to the analyst is turned into “knowing how to read Otherwise”. The fall of the subject supposed to know, reveals that behind the assumption of knowledge, pious seeming the patient attributed to the analyst, there is just a mere nothing, there is the rock of The Thing. It is this failure of the language which brings the subject to try to invent a relationship with the unconscious which urges him to question its formations, and which urges him to adduce a transference at work and a theoretical didactics having some others as witnesses. The psychoanalyst, whose existence depends on the analytical institution, has no other choice than to stay in the didactic of The Thing. As well in his practice as in group work, by the transference at work, the attempt to encircle The Thing is the point of living fire he has to revive constantly, to confront the questions of the enigma introduced by the unconscious into the culture.