拉岡講座235

拉岡講座235
‘5
FROM LOVE TO THE LIBIDO
從愛到力比多

The subject and the Other.
主體與大它者

Today I intend—this does not mean that I will have the time to do so—to take you from love, at the threshold of which I left things last time, to the libido.

今天，我想跟你們從愛談論到力比多，這是我上一次提到，但是沒有來得及發揮。今天也未必能有時間全部講完。

I will say at the outset what will be the burden of this elucidation by saying that the libido is not something fleeting or fluid, it cannot be divided up, or accumulated, like magnetism, in the centres of focusing offered it by the subject. The libido is to be conceived as an organ, in both senses of the term, as organ-part of the organism and as organ-instrument.

一開始，我將先說，我這樣說明有何負擔。力比多並不是瞬間或流動的東西，它無法像磁場一樣被分割，或累積，在主體提供給它的專注的中心。力比多應該被構想為一個器官，作為有機體的部份器官，跟作為器官工具。

I apologize if, as someone remarked last time, there are some obscurities along the way I take you. I believe that obscurity is characteristic of our field. Let us not forget that it is usual to represent the unconscious as a cellar, even as a cave, by way of allusion to Plato’s cave. But it is not a good comparison. The unconscious is much more like the bladder, and this bladder can be seen only if one places a little light inside it. Why should one be surprised if it sometimes takes a little time for the light
to come on?

上一次，有人評論我演講的內容艱澀難懂，對於此點，我甚表歉意。我相信，艱澀難懂正是我們精神分析領域的特色。讓我們不要忘了，無意識通常被比喻為地窖，甚至比喻為洞穴，如柏拉圖以洞穴比喻人的認知處境。但是這樣的比喻並不恰當。無意識更像是囊袋，囊袋裡面要有一點兒光線，才能看得見。假如光線要等一段時間才會出來，這有什麼好驚奇的？

In the subject who, alternately, reveals himself and conceals himself by means of the pulsation of the unconscious, we apprehend only partial drives. The ganze Sexualstrebung, the representation of the totality of the sexual drive, is not to be found there, Freud tells us. Following Freud, I will lead you
along the path of this conclusion, and I would state quite clearly that everything I have learnt from my experience accords with it. I cannot expect everybody here to agree with it fully, since some of you do not have this experience, but your presence here is evidence of a certain trust in what we shall call—in the role in which I am in relation to you, that of the Other—good faith. This good faith is no doubt always a precarious assumption—for where, in the end, does this relation of the subject to the Other end?

人作為主體，憑藉無意識的悸動，輪替顯露自己，旋又隱藏自己。我們所能理解的，只是部份客體。佛洛伊德告訴過我們，性的驅力，還無法完全代表無意識的整體性。我追隨佛洛伊德之後，引導你們繼續探索這個結論。我清楚地告訴你們，我從精神分析的經驗所體會到，跟這個結論完全符合。我無法期望在此的每個人都完全贊同我的觀點，因為你們有些人未必有這個經驗。但是你們出席在現場，就是證明你們有某個程度的信任，對於我跟你們有類似大它者的關係。無可置疑，這個信任未必都是一成不變，因為，人作為主體，跟大它者的關係，最後要發展到哪裡，誰能說個確定呢？

What I, Lacan, following the traces of the Freudian excavation, am telling you is that the subject as such is uncertain because he is divided by language. Through the effects of speech, the subject always realizes himself more in the Other, but he is already pursuing there more than half of himself. He will simply find his desire ever more divided, pulverized, in the circumscribable metonymy of speech. The effects of language are always mixed with the fact, which is the basis of the analytic experience, that the subject is subject only from being subjected to the field of the Other, the subject proceeds from his synchronic subjection in the field of the Other.

拉岡，我，追隨佛洛伊德的研究，現在所要告訴你們的是，人作為這樣的主體，是不確定的，因為他被語言所切割。受到語言的影響，主體總是從大它者那裡，體現他自己，但是他從大它者那裡，總是只追尋到自己的一半多一些而已。他將發現，儘管大它者演說得頭頭是道，他自己的欲望卻更加被切割，更加被粉碎。語言的影響，總是脫離不開現實，這也是精神分析經驗的基礎所在。人只有屈服於大它者的領域，才形成自己的主體。這個主體就在屈服於大它者領域的瞬間，才繼續發展。

That is why he must get out, get himself out, and in the getting-himself-out, in the end, he will know that the real Other has, just as much as himself, to get himself Out, to pull himself free. It is here that the need for good faith becomes imperative, a good faith based on the certainty that the same implication of difficulty in relation to the ways of desire is also in the Other.

那就是為什麼他必須掙扎，掙脫出來。就在讓自己掙脫出來的過程，最後他會知道，這個真實界代表的大它者，跟他一樣，必須讓他解脫，讓他獲得自由。就在這個地方，信心的需要是不可或缺的。它必須堅決地相信，就欲望的滿足而言，大它者遭遇的困難不會比他更少。

The truth, in this sense, is that which runs after truth—and that is where I am running, where I am taking you, like Actaeon’s hounds, after me. When I find the goddess’s hiding place, I will no doubt be changed into a stag, and you can devour me, but we still have a little way to go yet.

就這層意義來說，真理就是真理的追尋。那就是我正在追尋的地方，我正在引導你們，像阿達安帶著獵犬，隨著我去的地方。當我發現，戴安娜女神裸露身體正在幽深河流處戲水，我雀躍地一撲而上。毫無疑問地，我將被轉變成一隻雄鹿，而你們會像獵犬般將我吞噬。不過，我們距離這個結局，依舊還有一段路要走。

I
Did I perhaps represent Freud to you last time as some such figure as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? In his Le Salutpourlesjujfs, Leon Bloy depicts them as three equally old men who are there, according to one of the forms of Israel’s vocation, squatting around some piece of canvas on the ground, engrossed in that eternal occupation of dealing in second-hand goods. They are sorting out the various objects on the canvas. Some things they put on one side, others on the other. On one side, Freud puts the partial drives and on the other love. He says— They’re not the same.

上一次，我不是將佛洛伊德，比喻為像是阿伯拉罕、以撒克、及約伯，等先知的人物？在Le Salutpourlesjujfs 這本書中，里昂、布洛伊將他們那描述為三位年紀差不多的老人，依照以色列的職業種類，蹲坐在地上的帆布上，專注於買賣二手貨品的常年行業。他們將各種物品分門別類排列在帆布上。有些東西放在一邊，還有一些放在另一邊。在一邊，佛洛伊德放置的是部份客體，在另一邊，放置的是愛。他們並不相同。

The drives necessitate us in the sexual order—they come from the heart. To our great surprise, he tells us that love, on the other hand, comes from belly ,from the world of yum-yum. It may come as a surprise, but it elucidates for us something fundamental to analytic experience, namely, that the genital
drive, if it exists, is not at all articulated like the other drives —in spite of the love-hate ambivalence. In his premises, and in his own texts, Freud completely contradicts himself when he tells us that ambivalence may be regarded as one of the characteristics of the reversal of the Verkehrung of the drive.

各種驅力使我們必須被放置在性的秩序，它們來自心。令我們大吃一驚的，他告訴我們說，在另一方面，愛來自小腹部，來自甜美的性世界。這種說法也許出人意料之外，但是它替我們說明，在精神分析經驗最根本的東西，換言之，性器官的驅力，儘管具有愛恨交加的模稜兩可，若是存在，表現方式跟其它驅力完全不一樣。在他的假設，及在他的本文，佛洛伊德完全自我矛盾。他告訴我們，愛恨交加的模稜兩可，可以被認為是驅力的性器官具有翻轉功能的特色。

But when he examines it, he tells us quite clearly that ambivalence and reversion are not at all the same thing. If, therefore, the genital drive does not exist, then it can get f. . . formed somewhere else, on the other side from the one in which the drive is to be found, on the left of my schema on the blackboard. You will have noticed already that it is on the right, in the field of the Other, that the genital drive has to find its form.

但是他檢視性的驅力時，佛洛伊德相當清楚地告訴我們，愛恨交加及彼此翻轉，完全是兩碼子事。因此，性的驅力即使不存在此處，它仍然能夠在別處形成，在驅力能夠被找到的地方的別處形成，在我畫在黑板上的這個基型的左邊形成。你們可能已經發現到，性的驅力必須是在右邊，在大它者的領域，找到它的形式。

Well! This is precisely borne out by what we learn in the analytic experience, namely, that the genital drive is subjected to the circulation of the Oedipus complex, to the elementary and other structures of kinship. This is what is designated as the field of culture—somewhat inadequately, because this field is
supposed to be based on a no man’s land in which genitality as such subsists, whereas it is in fact dissolved, not re-assembled, for the ganze Sexualsirebung is nowhere apprehensible in the subject.
Yet because it is nowhere, it is nevertheless diffused, and it is this that Freud is trying to convey to us in this article.

好罷！這確實是我們從精神分析經驗獲知所證實，換言之，性的驅力隸屬於伊底普斯情結的流通的轄域，隸屬於親屬關係的最基本及其它的結構。這就是被指明為文化領域的東西。這樣說相當不貼切，因為文化的這個領域，基礎應該被建立在，性的驅力的存活，有賴於超越個人的領域，但實際上，性的驅力在此受到瓦解，而不是重新組合，因為主體的性的欲望的凝視，完全無法讓人理解。可是，它儘管無法讓人理解，卻又是四處散播。就是這一點，佛洛伊德在這篇文章，設法要傳達給我們的。

Everything he says about love tends to emphasise the fact that, in order to conceive of love, we must necessarily refer to another sort of structure than that of the drive. He divides this structure into three, three levels—the level of real, the level of the economic and the level of the biological.

他談到愛的種種現象，用意在強調這個事實：為了構想愛是什麼，我們必須在軀力的結構之外，先提到另一種結構。他將這種結構區分為三個層次：真實界的層次、經濟界的層次，及生物界的層次。

To these levels correspond three oppositions. To the level of the real corresponds the that-which-interests/that-which is- indifferent opposition. To the level of the economic, that which-
gives-pleasure/that-which-displeases. It is only at the level of the biological that the activity/passivity opposition presents itself; in its own form, the only valid one in its grammatical sense, the loving/being loved position.

針對於這三種層次，對應著三種對立。針對真實界的層次，對應著引人興趣與冷漠相待的對立；針對經濟的層次，對應著給人快樂與令人不悅的對立。只有在生物的這個層次，主動與被動的對立，才會以自己的方式出現。愛與被愛的立場，在文法的語態上是能自圓其說的。

We are invited by Freud to consider that love, in its essence, can be judged only as a sexual passion of thegesamt Ich. Now, in Freud, gesamt Ich is a hapax, to be understood in the sense suggested in his account of the pleasure principle. The gesam: Ich is the field that I have invited you to regard as a surface and a fairly limited surface so that the blackboard is able to represent it, and so that everything may be included in it on paper. I am referring to the network that is represented by arcs, lines linking points of convergence, of which the closed circle marks whatever is to be preserved in tensional homeostasis, in lower tension, in necessary diversion, in diffusion of excitement into innumerable channels—whenever it might be too intense in any one of them.

佛洛伊德要求我們認為，在其本質上，愛的真實與否，只有當著是一種真實自我的性的激情，才能夠被判斷。現在，在佛洛伊德的用詞，真實自我是一種歡愉自在，我們應該從他描述快樂原理所用的意義來理解。真實自我這個領域，我建議你們將它視為是一個表面，而且是一個相當有限的表面。這樣，我才能夠在黑板上畫出來，在論文報告包括在裡面。我現在所提到的是各種弧線代表的網絡，各種聯繫線的匯聚點，封閉的圓圈代表緊張的體內平衡所保存的東西，例如，愛的強烈緊張，各種必須的娛樂，興奮的洋溢一處容不下，就散發到無數的頻道。

The filtering from stimulation to discharge is the apparatus, the dome, to be circumscribed on a sphere, in which is defined at first what he calls the stage of the Real-Ich. And it is to this that, later in his discourse, he attributes the qualification autoerotisch.

從興奮刺激，到發洩的過濾，就是我們在一個球狀領域所劃定界限的裝置領域。佛洛伊德所講的真實自我的階段，就被劃分在那裡。在他後來的論述，佛洛伊德又添加「自動性欲」的特質，到這個領域。

Analysts have concluded from this that—as it must be situated somewhere in what is called development, and since what Freud says is gospel—the infant must regard everything around him as indifferent. One wonders how things can go on, in a field of observers for whom articles of faith have such overwhelming value in relation to observation. For, after all, if there is one thing that cannot be said about the infant it is that he shows no interest in what enters his field of perception.

精神分析師從這裡得到一個結論：真實自我必須在所謂成長的過程找到定位，既然佛洛伊德所說像是人間福音，嬰兒看待周圍世界，必然先是冷眼旁觀。他們會驚奇，周遭的世界是怎麼一回事。他們處於一個觀察者的領域，信心的培養對於觀察會有舉足輕重的影響。畢竟，關於嬰兒，有一件絕對不可能發生的事情，那就是他們對於進入他們感官領域的東西，絕對不會不感到興趣。

There can be no doubt that there are objects deriving from the earliest period of the neo-natal phase. Autoerotisch can in no way mean a lack of interest in them. If you read Freud on this, you will see that the second stage, the economic stage, consists precisely in that the second Ich—the second in a de jure sense, the second in logical sequence—is the Lust-Ich, which he calls purifiziert, the purified Lust-Ich, which is established in the field exterior to the dome in which I designate the first Real-Ich of
Freud’s explanation.

無可置疑地，在新生嬰兒的早期階段，我們會得到一些東西。自動性欲絲毫並不意味著，嬰兒對於性欲欠缺興趣。假如你閱讀佛洛伊德，你會看出，第二階段，經濟的階段，確實就是在那第二自我，具有欲望的第二自我，在形成順序上的第二自我，在那個欲望的自我，他稱之為「最純粹的欲望的自我」。這第二自我，被建立的領域，處於佛洛伊德所解釋的第一個真實的自我的領域的外圍。

The autoerotisch consists in the fact—and Freud himself stresses this—that there would be no emergence of objects if there were no objects of use to me. This is the criterion of the emergence and distribution of objects. Here, then, is constituted the Lust-Ich, and also the field of the Unlust, of the object as remainder, as alien. The object that one needs to know, and with good reason, is that which is
defined in the field of Unlust, whereas the objects of the field of the Lust-Ich are lovable. The hassen, with its profound link with knowledge, is the other field.

自動性欲在於這個事實，佛洛伊德自己也強調這一點，假如我不覺得有任何東西對我有用途，那些東西對我而言，等於是不存在。這就是東西的存在及散佈的標準。因此，欲望的自我就是如此構成，無欲望的領域也如此構成，東西作為一種客體的殘餘物，像是外星人寄居我們的體內。我們所需要去知道，而且理所當然需要去知道的東西，就是在位於無欲望領域的東西，儘管欲望的自我的領域的東西，看起來比較可愛。在無欲望這個它者的領域，主體恍然大悟時，愛常常轉變成恨。

At this level, there is no trace of drive functions, except those that are not true drives, and which Freud calls in his text the Ichtriebe. The level of the Ich is not that of the drive, and it is there—I would ask you to read the text very attentively—that Freud grounds love. Everything that is defined in this way at the level of the Ich assumes sexual value, passes from the Er/witungstrieb, from preservation, to the Sexualtrieb, only in terms of the appropriation of each of these fields, its seizure, by one of the partial drives. Freud says quite clearly that Vorhangung des Wesentlichen, to bring out the essential here, it is purely passive, in non-drive, way that the subject records the ãusseren Reize, that which comes from the external world. Its activity comes only durch seine eigene Triebe, from its own drives. It is a question here of the diversity of the partial drives. In this way, we are brought to the third level that he introduces, that of activity/passivity.2

在這個層次，並沒有驅力的功用的痕跡，除了那些並不是屬於真正驅力的功用，那些功用的痕跡，佛洛伊德稱之為「自我的驅力」。這個自我的層次，並不是驅力的層次。我要求你們很仔細地閱讀佛洛伊德本文，他將自我的層次建立在愛的基礎上。在自我的層次，以這種方式定義的一切東西，都具有性的價值，從性的自我保存功能，傳遞到性的驅力，用性充當部份客體，奪取那些領域的各個領域。佛洛伊德很清楚地說，為了顯示自我的真實本質，主體以純粹是被動的，非外在驅力的方式，記錄這個來自外在世界的客體。主體的活動只是來自它自己的驅力。當然，這個問題牽涉到部份驅力的多樣形態的問題。以這種方式，我們開始要談到佛洛伊德介紹的第三個層次，也就是主動與被動的層次。

Before noting the consequences of this, I would simply like to draw your attention to the classic character of this conception of love. Is there any need to stress that se vouloir son bien, to wish
oneself one’s own well being, is exactly the equivalent of what is traditionally called the physical theory of love, St Thomas’s velle bonum alicui, which, for us, on account of the function of
narcissism has exactly the same value. I have long stressed the specious character of this supposed altruism, which is pleased to preserve whose well being?—of him who, precisely, is necessary to us.

在談到它的結果之前，我僅想要提醒你們注意，愛的觀念在傳統上具有的特性。我有需要再三強調嗎？祈求自己一生的幸福，完全就是等於傳統上，如聖、湯姆士所稱為的愛的具體理論嗎？自戀的功用不也具有完全相同的價值？我曾經一再強調，大家都公認，自利的人也具有利他的特性。這個利他的特性，是想要維護誰的幸福呢？準確地說，是要維護跟我們有必要關係的人的幸福。

雄伯譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw