The phallus is essentially metonymic. Its significance leads to the question of (lack of) power. The psychoanalytic institution as a locus of training has not escaped from the power equation: the enjoyment glides in its many layers of inter-relationships, sustaining the imaginary phallus (sign of power) that provides knowledge (always supposed to) and the legitimation of the status of psychoanalyst (always precarious). It discusses here the institutional context in which the histeric's and the analyst's discourses go together in the training. Between these discourses, the master's discourse becames legitimating powers?