Logic of Phantasy 32 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 32
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉岡

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 8
幻见的逻辑
Seminar 8: Wednesday, January 18, 1967

Undoubtedly these … devices, as I might say, will appear to you a little bit more advanced in their results than those that Freud gives you, but Freud gives you plenty of them to encourage you to go along the same path. Namely, that when you take the Secerno dream, the dream in which you have to close either one eye or two eyes, you will notice what that signifies. Namely, that this means, that one cannot have, at the same time, one eye or two eyes open, that it is not the same thing.

无可置疑，这些策略，如我所言，对於你们似乎有点太过先进，比起佛洛伊德给你们的那些结果。但是，佛洛伊德也曾给予你们许多策略，鼓励你们朝相同的途径前进。换句话说，当你们看到这个「西色末」的梦，在这个梦里，你们必须闭上一隻眼睛或两隻眼睛，你们将会注意到，那是什麽意思。换句话说，这个梦意味着，我们无法同时张开一隻眼睛，或两隻眼睛。那不是相同的事情。

In short, the legitimacy of the logic of the phantasy is precisely this something for which Freud’s whole chapter, to speak of only that one, prepares us. Prepares us by showing us that what Freud is tracing the path of, is a logic of these thoughts. Namely, the following, which means: it requires this support of the locus of the Other, which cannot, very precisely, be articulated here except by a therefore, I am not.
So here we are suspended at the level of this function, at a you are not, therefore I am not. Does that not tickle your ears in a certain way? Do we not have here, I would say, the most importunate language of love itself?

总之，幻见逻辑的合理性，确实就是这个某件东西，佛洛伊德整个章节，或那个唯一的章节，替我们準备的。他告诉我们，佛洛伊德正在追踪这条途径，也就是这些思想的逻辑。换句话说，以下的内容意味着：它要求大它者的轨迹的这个支持。这个表达确实地说，就是「因此，我存在」。所以，我们现在被悬置在这个功用的层次，在一个「你不存在，因此，我不存在」的层次。这句话，你们听了会不会耳朵发痒？我们现在所谈论的，我不妨这样说，就是爱情本身的缠绵不绝的语言。

What does that mean? Must we take further the sense, which moreover gives its truth: you are only what I am. Everyone knows and can recognise that if the sense of love, is indeed in effect this formula that I give, love in fact in its agitation, in its naive elan, as in many of its discourses, does not commend itself as a function of thinking.

那是什麽意思？我们必须将这个意义，再探讨下去，显露它的真相吗？你们仅是那个「我存在」。每一个人都知道，而且能够体让出，假如爱的这个意义，实际上就是我提供的这个公式，情到深处无怨尤的爱情，如许多爱情的真理论述所言，它並没有推荐它自己，当着是一种思想的功用。

I mean that if, from a formula such as you are not, therefore I am not, there emerges (11) the monster whose effect we know rather well in everyday life, it is very precisely in so far as this truth – that of the you are not, therefore I am not – is rejected )verworfen) in love. The manifestation of love in the real is very precisely the characteristic that I state of every Verwerfung, namely, the most inconvenient and the most depressing effects – this is a still further illustration of it – in which the paths of love are nowhere to be designated as so easily traced out.

我的意思是，从一个像「你不存在，因此，我就不存在」，这样的公式，会出现这样一个怪物，它的影响，我们在日常生活中，知道得很清楚。确实就是这个真理，「你不存在，因此，我就不存在」的这个真理，在爱情中被拒绝。爱情在真实界中的验证，恰恰就是我陈述的每一个「拒绝」的这个特癥。那是最不方便，也是最令人沮丧的影响，举例说明得更加深刻：爱情的途径，没有比这个地方所追踪出来的，更加明确。

Assuredly, in Descartes’ time there was no one unaware of these laws, of course. We were at the time of Angelus Silesius, who dared to say to God: “If I were not there, well then, it is very simple, you, God, qua existing God, you would not be there either”. In such an epoch one can talk about the problems of our own: more exactly one can put oneself back there to form a judgement on what constitutes an impasse for us.

确实地，在笛卡尔的时代，没有人不知道这些法则，这是当然的。当时，我们处在安吉拉、西里西思的时代，他敢跟上帝说：「假如我不在那里，那很简单，你，上帝，作为存在的上帝，你将也不在那里。」在这样一个时代，我们能够谈论我们自己的问题：更贴切地说，我们能够退回那里，来判断我们自己造成的僵局是什麽。

What does Freud tell us, to take further the examination of his logic? If you still have the slightest doubt about the nature of the subversion, which makes of the Bedeutung – in so far as we grasp it at the moment of its alteration, of its torsion as such, of its amputation, indeed of its ablation – the source that allows us to recognise in it the reestablished function of logic, if you still have the slightest doubt, you would see these doubts vanishing by seeing how Freud, in the dream, reintegrates everything that appears there as judgement, whether these judgements are internal to the lived experience of this dream, but still more when they present themselves as – in appearance – waking judgements.

若是将佛洛伊德的逻辑更进一步审查，他告诉我们什麽呢？假如你依旧有丝毫怀疑，关於这个颠覆的特质，它组成「人生的意义」。据我们对它所理解的，当它在轮替、扭转、切除、的确，当它在脱离的时刻，这个来源容许我们认出它，在逻辑的重新建立的运作中。假如你依旧有丝毫的怀疑，你将会看到这些怀疑消失，当你看到佛洛伊德在梦中，如何重新合并出现在那里，作为对他判断的一切。这些判断，是否就是这个梦的生活过的经验的内化，但是，更重要的是，这些判断的呈现，表面上，是清醒时刻的判断。

When, he tells us, in connection with the dream, something in the dreamer’s account, is indicated as being a moment of oscillation, of interruption, of lacuna (as formerly I said at the time when I was making something of the “lacuna”) Lucken, an Unterbrechung, a rupture, in the account that I, the dreamer, may give of it, this itself is to be reinstated, Freud tells us, as forming part of the text of the dream. And what does this designate? It is enough for me to refer, somewhere, to what Freud gives us as an example of it. “I was going”, says one of his dreamers, “in das Volksgarten restaurant – into the Volksgarten Restaurant with Fraulein K…” And here, there is a dunkel Stelle, this is the passage of which there is nothing more to be said, he no longer knows. And then it takes up again: “then I found myself in the salon of a brothel, – in dem ich zwei oder drei Frauen sehe – where I saw two or three women, one in her chemise and drawers.” (SE 4 333).

关於这个梦，佛洛伊德告诉我们，在作梦者所描述的某件事情，被指明为是一个摇摆、中断、脱漏的时刻，（如同以前，我在解释「脱漏」的意义）。「摇摆」「中断」，断裂，在作梦者，我，给予梦的描述里，这个梦的本身，应该要重新被恢复，佛洛伊德告诉我们，当着是梦的本文的组成内容。这个指明的是什麽？这足够让我引述，佛洛伊德在某个地方提供给我们的例子。「我当时正要去」，其中一位作梦者说，「在波克园酒店，正要跟佛罗连进入波克园酒店、、、」在此，有一个「黑暗的星座」，这就是再也无话可说的通道，他不再知道。然后，梦的描述又再开始：「然后，我发现自己置身在一家妓院的沙龙里。在那里，我看到两三个女人，一个穿着宽鬆内衣跟内裤。」

The analysis: Fraulein K. is the daughter of his former chief, and what is characteristic, is the circumstance in which he had to speak to her and which he designates in these terms: “it was just as though we had become aware of – Mann sich erkante, – gleischsam: in a sort of equality – in seiner Geschlechtigleit, of her sexual (12) quality, as if what was being said was: I am a man Ich bin ein Mann – und du ein Weib – and you a woman.” (ibid. with Lacan’s nuances)

梦的解析：佛罗连是他以前主管的女儿，最具特癥的是，他必须跟她对谈的情境，他用这些词语指明说：「好像我们已经知道，处於平等的身份，知道她的性的特质。好像当时所说出来的话是：我是一个男人，你是一个女人。」

Here, very precisely is why Fraulein K. is chosen to constitute the beginning of the dream, but also no doubt to determine its syncopation. For what is going to follow, in the dream, proves itself very precisely to be what comes to disturb this lovely relation full of certainties between man and woman. Namely, that the three persons who are linked, for him, to the memory of this restaurant and who also represent the ones that he finds in the salon of the brothel are, respectively, his sister, the wife of his brother-in-law, and a friend of hers (or of his, it does not matter). In any case three women with whom one cannot say that his relations are marked by a frank and direct sexual approach.

在此，确实是为什麽，佛罗连被选择来当这个梦的开始，而且毫无疑问的，被选择来决定梦的中断。因为后面跟随而来的，在梦中，证明本身确实就是一种扰乱，在男人与女人之间的牢不可破的关系。换句话说，对於他而言，这三个人跟这家酒店的回忆息息相关，他们也代表他在妓院的沙龙里发现的三个人，分别是他的姐姐、他的小舅子的太太、及她的一位朋友（或是他的一位朋友，不过这並不重要）。无论如何，这三个女人，我们无法说，他跟她们的关系，是有坦白及直接的性的接触。

In other words, what Freud demonstrates to us as being always and strictly correlative to this syncopation of the Trauminhalt, to the deficiency of the signifiers, is, precisely, anything whatsoever in language (and not simply the mirages of looking into one another’s eyes) that, once it is reproached, would put in question what is involved in the relations of sex as such.

换句话说，佛洛伊德对我们证明，他「神奇梦境」的中略，跟意符的这个欠缺，总是有密切关系。它确实是「语言」里的任何东西（不仅是观看到彼此眼神里的妄想）。一但它受到谴责，它会置疑到性的交往所牵涉到的问题。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com
springherohsiung@hotmail.com