Logic of Phantasy 84 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 84
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 19
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 19: Wednesday, May 10, 1967

Good … I want first of all to announce to you that to my great regret I will not be giving this lecture – or this
seminar, whatever you want to call it – next Wednesday. Because of the fact that there is a strike and that after all I intend for my part to respect it, besides the inconveniences that would be caused by the fact that it is announced that, all electricity being cut off, what has given me so much trouble, for several sessions, to make function here for your benefit and my own, would be rendered useless. Therefore, it should be written up again between now and the end of the session, so that the people who arrive late will not be unaware of the fact that the next seminar, since it is called that, will only take place in a fortnight’s time. This, I believe, is the 10th May, so that gives us then the 10th. We will meet therefore on the 24th. Has anyone any observation to make to me about what I communicated to you at the last session? Has anyone reflected especially – I am putting my cards on the table – about what I wrote on the blackboard?

好、、我首先要跟你们宣佈，下个星期三，我很遗憾不再跟你们发表这个演讲，或这个讲座，随你们怎麽称呼。因为有罢工正在进行，就我而言，这代表一种尊重，而且，听说电源若是被切断，事实上，也会引起很多上课的不便。这好几节课来，我费心经营，让大家获益的功用，也会全功尽弃。因此，在目前跟这节课结束之间，我先表明，这样迟到的人才不会不知道，下一堂课将隔两个星期，才会再举行。我相信那是五月十日，我们就暂定是十日。然后就是二十四日。在这个最后的一堂课，你们对於我所表达的内容有没有什麽要评论的？有没有人有特别的感触？我将我要讲述的纲要，都书写在黑版上。

It seems not … and I de not know whether or not this should make me breathe again! Is it because of the
profound distraction with which people receive what I may write? But in any case, I was furious with myself when you went home, for having written on the blackboard the formula of small o which is, of course, the square root of 5 minus 1 over 2-and then immediately afterwards, the value of the square root of 5 as 2.236 … anyway, and something … I was making some jokes about the logarithmic tables, but I would have been better off specifying for you, of course, that what I was writing there was not the value of small o , of course, but the square root of 5.

似乎没有。我不知道我是否应该又轻鬆一口气！因为这次深深的扰乱，人们会接纳我书写的内容吗？无论如何，我自己非常懊恼，因为你们回家的原因是，我在黑板上书写小客体的公式，当然，五的平方根减一，充当二的分子，立刻你们得到的五的平方根的价值是：2.236、、、无论如何，我只是耍弄一些对数表的把戏。但是我本来最好跟你们指明，我书写在那里的东西，並不是小客体的价值，而是五的平方根。

You must not imagine that small o is two point something of other! Since on the contrary small o is less than unity. It is a figure which is a little bit greater than six tenths, and this is something that it is not pointless to know when you want to inscribe these lengths or these lines that A make use of, and to put in almost exact proportion length of small o next to the (2) length defined as being equivalent to the unit.

你们一定不要以为，小客体是两个不同的点。相反的，小客体並没有那样的一致性。这是一个数目，比十分之六稍微大一点。。假如你们想要铭记某甲使用的这些长度或这些线条，然后插入几乎是确实的比率，在相等於是这个单位所定义的这个长度的旁边，了解这个小客体，可能不无帮助。

The second error that I made, is that after a long series of equalities, specifically that inscribed by the one plus o over 1, for example, I finished at the end by writing, equals small o when it was 1/o that should have been written. Good, in any case, let those who have copied these formulae correct them!

我犯的第二个错误是，经过一连串的平等式后，明确地说，例如，一加零充当一的分子，我以书写充当结果，相等於是小客体，当它本来应该被书写为零分之一。好吧，无论如何，让抄写这些公式的自行修正。

We continue to advance into our object for this year and, of course, this logic that I am developing before you under the name of a logic of the phantasy, has a goal that I frequently defined and which must necessarily finally come to be applied. To be applied to something that could only be, of course, a work of sifting or even properly speaking criticism, against what is advanced at a certain level of experience and in a theoretical form, which, sometimes, leads to mistakes.

我们继续谈论我们今年的目标。当然，我现在你们面前推展的这个逻辑，以「幻见的逻辑」的名义，有一个我时常定义的目标，这个目标最后必须要被运用。要被运用到某件东西，当然，那件东西必须是经过筛选过，适当地说，是被批判过，根据在某个精神分析经验的层次，及以理论的形式，有时候，还难免会有错误。

With this in mind, I opened, or rather reopened, for your use, a work which did not fail to appear important to me when it was produced, and it is quite accessible to all of you since it has been translated into French under the name of La nevrose de base, by someone who undoubtedly lacks neither talent nor analytic penetration and who is called Mr. Bergler.

心里带着这个构想，我打开，或重新打开，一部作品让你们使用，你们一定会觉得这部作品的举止轻重，它已经被翻译成为法文，书名是「神经质官能症」，你们很容易就拿得大。无可置疑的，作者勃格勒，才华横溢，兼具透彻分析的能力。

It is a work that I recommend to you – since you are again going to have a fortnight before you – that I recommend to you by way of example or of occasional … support, of the use that our work here can be put to. In recommending it to you by way of example, of course, this does not mean that I am recommending it to you as a model! It is, nevertheless, as I have already said, a work of great merit. It is certainly not along these paths that we will in any way see being clarified what is involved in the nature of neurosis. But undoubtedly, this does not men either that something is not glimpsed there about some essential mainspring.

我推荐你们这部作品，因为距离下一堂课还有两个星期，我推荐你们，凑巧可以作为例证，印证我们的工作。当然推荐给你们作为例证，並不意味着，我推荐它当着说模范，虽然如无所说的，那是一部具有很多优点的作品。神经质病患的特性所牵涉到东西，我们並无法从这个途径，来获得澄清。

The notions of structure which are put forward here (and which, moreover, in the sense that I am using this word at the moment, are not the privilege of this author), what is stated usually in the notion of layers – that for the same reason one layers things from the superficial to the deep or, inversely, from the deep to the superficial – those specifically from which the author start s. Which means that in the cases that he envisages, but again it must be added that he considers them as by far the most numerous in neurosis, the basis defined in his sense by what he calls “oral regression”, are defined by something that after all I have no reason since it is summarised there in a few lines – not to directly borrow from his text (it would be safer!): “”Oral neurotics are people who constantly provoke the situation of the following triad of the ‘mechanism of orality’:

它提出结构的观念（我目前也在使用结构这个字词，它不是作者的专利），它通常用「表层」的观念陈述。如用我们将事物从外表到内部，或倒转过来，从内部到表层，给予层级化。作者就是从那些表层的结构开始。这意味着，他构想的病例，是从他认为数额最多的神经质病患来考虑，他以所谓的「口腔期的倒退」的意义作为基础。畢竟，我没有理由仅是以潦潦数行就概括它们，而不直接诉诸他的原文，较为稳当：「口腔的神经质病患经常挑激【口腔机械功用】的三角关系的情况。」

(1) I shall repeat the masochist wish of being deprived by my mother …””

（第一）我就重复被我们母亲剥夺的受虐狂的希望、、、

(3) Will someone write: 1st “To be deprived (Etre rejete)”, in the top right hand corner. Muriel! If you do not mind, will you do that for me. Take one of these big gadgets that are there for that.

某个人写到：首先，「被剥夺」，在顶端的右手边角落。繆仁！假如你不介意，请帮我一下。拿那些的机件跟我。

“Secondly, I shall not be” … I am finishing the first paragraph: ” I shall repeat the masochistic wish”, therefore, “of being deprived by my mother, by creating or misusing situations in which some substitute of my pre-oedipal mother-image shall refuse my wishes.”

「其次，我将不要」、、、我快要抄完第一段：「我将重复被母亲剥夺的受虐狂的希望」，因此，「我使用創造或误用这些情境，这样我的伊底普斯前期的母亲形象，将会拒绝我的愿望。」

This is the deepest layer, the one to which access is most difficult, the one against the revelation of which the subject will defend himself most strongly and for the longest time. (I am saving this for listeners in this room who are complete novices).

这个是最深层的部分，我们最难进入。主体防衛自己最坚强的部分，也最久，不让它轻易曝光的部分。（我先讲到这里，等一下那些正在修理机件的听众）。

“(2) I shall not be conscious of my wish to be refused and initial provocation of refusal, and see only that I am justified in self-defense, righteous indignation and pseudo-aggression because of the refusal.”
2nd “Pseudo-aggression”. Write only these words, please.

（第二）我将不会知道我的希望被拒绝，被拒绝的最初挑衅。我只看到我的自我防衛的振振有理，因为这样的拒绝，它是一种正当的愤怒及虚假的攻击。第二次的「虚假的攻击」。请将这些字书写下来。

“(3) Afterwards, I shall pity myself because such an injustice can only happen to me, and enjoy once more psychic masochistic pleasure.”

（第三）后来，我将自怜自艾，因为这样的不公正只会发生到位身上。我将再一次享受到心理的受虐狂的快乐。

I pass over what Bergler adds in terms of what he calls “the clinical picture”, a singular differentiation, moreover, that he makes between what he calls “the clinical picture”, a singular genesis of the problem – “the genetic picture” – this clinical form or aspect being defined for him by the intervention of a super-ego, whose vigilance consists precisely in maintaining the presence of the element that he designates here as masochistic, as an always active element in the maintenance of the defence.

我绕过勃格勒所补充的所谓「诊所的画面」。他对於所谓的「诊所的画面」，做了一个很独特的区别，把它当着是问题的开端，跟「发生起源的画面」。后者是诊所的形式，被他定义为一个超我的介入，他的警觉确实在於要维持他所指明的受虐狂的因素的存在，作为自我防衛的积极因素。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com