Anxiety 75 Jacques Lacan

Anxiety 75

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

30.1.63 X 117
Seminar 10: Wednesday 30 January 1963

Here is the truth which in this opaque, gross form is the one
that analytic experience gives us, and which it introduces with its irreducible character into any reflection henceforth possible on any conceivable form of our condition. This point, it must be clearly said, involves enough of the intolerable for us to ceaselessly try to distort it, which has no doubt two aspects, namely that in this very effort we are doing more than sketching out its outlines and that we are always tempted, in the very measure that we approach this outline, to forget it in function of the very structure that this lack represents.

在此就是這個真理。以這個晦澀難懂的粗略形態，精神分析經驗給予我們的這個真理。它介紹這個真理，以其無法化簡的特性，進入任何可能的反思，對於我們的情況，任何可構想的形式。我們必須很清楚地說，這一點牽涉到足夠令人難於容忍的東西，讓我們不斷地反駁它。無可置疑的，它具有兩面。換句話說，在這一方面的努力，我們不僅僅是描繪出它的輪廓，我們總是被引誘，隨著我們接近這個輪廓，被引誘去忘記它，在這個欠缺所代表的結構的功用。

4
Whence it results, another truth, that we could say that every
turn of our experience rests on the fact that the relationship to the Other, in so far as it is that in which there is situated
every possibility of symbolisation and the locus of discourse, is connected with a structural flaw, and that we are obliged – this is the further step – to conceive that we are touching here on what makes possible this relationship to the Other, namely this point from which it emerges that there is signifier (du siqnifiant), is the one which in a way cannot be signified.

它結果產生另外一件真理。我們能夠說，我們精神分析經驗的每一個轉折，都依靠這個事實，跟大它者的關係，是跟一個結構性的缺點息息相關，因為意符化的每個可能，跟真理論述的軌跡，位置都在那裏。更進一步的推展，我們不得不構想，在此我們碰觸到跟大它者的關係成為可能的地方。換句話說，這一點在某一方面，是無法被意符化，雖然意符是從那裏出現。

This (6) is what is meant by what I call the “lack of signifier”
point.

這就是我所謂的「意符的欠缺」點的意思。

And recently, I heard someone who does not understand me too
badly at all, responding to me, questioning me, whether this does not mean that we refer ourselves to that which in any signifier is in a way the imaginary material, the shape of the word or that of the Chinese character, if you wish, what is irreducible in the fact that it is necessary that every signifier should have an intuitive support like the others, like all the rest.

最近，我聽到某個根本就不瞭解我的人，對我回應說，這難道不是意味著，我們將自己比喻為某方面是想像的材料，就任何的意符而言，字的形狀，或是中國字的形狀。這個事實所無法化簡的是，每個意符必須應該有一個直覺得支持，就像其他的意符，就像所有的其他的意符。

Well, precisely not. For of course, this is the temptation that arises in this connection. This is not what is involved as regards this lack. And in order to make you sense it, I will refer to definitions which I have already given you and which ought to be enough. I told you: “There is no lack which is not of the symbolic order. But privation, for its part, is something real.

確實不是這樣。當然，這是個有關它產生的引誘。這是關於這個欠缺，所牽涉到的內涵。為了讓你們感覺到它，我將提到我已經給予你們的定義，這些定義應該是足夠。我告訴你們：「沒有一個欠缺不是屬於意符的秩序。但是被剝奪的本身，就是某件真實界。」

” What we are speaking about is something real; what my
discourse turns around, when I try to represent for you this
decisive point, which nevertheless we always forget, not only in our theory, but in our practice of analytic experience, is a privation which manifests itself as much in the theory as in the practice, it is a real privation and which as such can be reduced. Is it enough to designate it in order to remove it?

「我們正在談論的是某件真實界的東西。我的真理論述向後回轉，當我設法跟你們呈現這個關鍵點。可是我們總是忘記這個關鍵點，不但在我們的理論，而且在我們精神分析經驗的實際做法。這是一種剝奪展示自己，在理論當中，而且在實際的做法。這是一種真實界的被剝奪，它本身能夠被化簡。這難道不是足夠指明它，為了要驅除它？」

If we manage to circumscribe it scientifically – which is perfectly conceivable – it is enough to work over the analytic literature, an example of which I will give you in a little while, namely a sample, to begin with – there is no other way of doing this – I took the first volume of the International Journal which came to hand and I will show you that almost everywhere we find the problem involved: whether one speaks about anxiety, about acting-out or about – since it is the title of the article to (7) which I will allude later – about R – I am not the only one who makes use of letters – the total response.

假如我們成功地以科學的方式限制它，（這是非常可以想像得到），這就足夠
讓我們孜孜從事精神分析文獻的探討。等一下，我將給予你們一個例子。換句話說，一個開始的樣本。（除了這樣，我別無他法）。我拿到寄到我這裏的國際精神分析雜誌的第一冊。我將指給你們看，幾乎我們發現會牽涉到一些問題的地方。無論是我們談論的焦慮，關於激情演出，或是關於、、、這是這篇文章的標題，我以後會提到它，關於R先生的整個回應。（容我用字母姑隱其名）。

The total response of the analyst in the analytic situation, by someone whom it happens we rediscover, of whom I spoke in the second year of my seminar, Margaret Little by name, we will find this problem very well centered and we can define it: where is the privation situated, where obviously does she slip up in the measure that she attempts to get closer and closer to the problem that a certain type of patient poses for her? It is not this, the reduction, the privation, the symbolization, its articulation here which will remove the lack. This is what we have to keep clearly in mind from the start, and if it is only to understand what is signified from one point of view by a mode of appearance of this lack: as I told you, privation is something real.

精神分析師在精神分析的情境，接受某個人的整個回應。這個人，我們湊巧重新發現，這個人，我在我講座的第二年就曾談到。她的名字是瑪格麗特。我們發現這個問題集中在她身上，我們能夠定義出來。這個被剝奪位置在哪里？什麼地方是她疏漏的地方，隨著她企圖越來越靠近這個問題，某種的病人跟她提出的問題？在此，這個，這個化簡，這個剝奪，這個意符化，意符的表達，都不足以驅除這個空洞。從某一個觀點來看，即使我們為了理解，什麽東西被這個空洞的出現的模式所意符化：如同我告訴你們的，被剝奪是一件真實界的事情。

It is clear that a woman does not have a penis. But if you do not symbolise the penis as the essential element to have or not to have, she will know nothing of this privation. Lack for its part is symbolic.

顯而易見，女人並沒有陰莖。但是假如你們不將陰莖象徵為擁有與沒有擁有的基本元素，她對於這個被剝奪，根本就一無所知。就本身而言，欠缺是意符象徵的東西。

Castration appears in the course of analysis, in so far as this relationship with the Other, which moreover did not wait for analysis to be constituted, is fundamental. Castration, as I told you, is symbolic, namely it refers to a certain phenomenon of lack, and at the level of this symbolisation, namely, in the relationship to the Other, in so far as the subject has to constitute himself in the analytic discourse.

在精神分析的過程，會出現閹割的問題，因為跟大它者的關係是基本，儘管大它者並不等待精神分析學被建構後才出現。我告訴過你們，閹割是一種意符象徵。換句話說，它提到某種的欠缺的現象。在這個意符象徵化的層次，換句話說，在跟大它者的關係，生命的主體必須構成他自己，在精神分析真理論述裏。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw