Anxiety 233 Jacques Lacan

Anxiety 233

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
22.5.63 XIX 224
Seminar 19: Wednesday 22 May 1963

I will return to this. But it is nonetheless also striking, if you consult these articles, to see the degree to which at the end, he gets himself – and undoubtedly for want of any of these(5) theoretical supports which allow a style of study to give itself its proper limits – into inextricable confusion.

我將回到這一點。可是，這也是耐人尋味的，假如你們參閱這些文章，看到這個程度，他最後將自己陷入無法掙脫的混淆的程度。（無可置疑的，因為缺任何理論的支持，這些支持讓研究的風格能夠給予自己適當的限制。）

It is not enough for the shofar and the voice that it supports to be presented as an analogy of the phallic function – and in effect why not – but how and at what level is where the question begins, it is also there that he comes to a halt.

我們若僅是將理論所支持的羊角號及聲音，呈現當著是陽具功用的類比，這樣是不足夠的。（事實上，有何不可呢？）這個問題如何開始，以及以什麼層次開始，這也是他停頓的地方。

It is not enough that such an intuitive, analogical handling of the symbol, leaves the interpreter, at a certain limit, stripped of all criteria for there not to appear at the same time the degree to which there is telescoped together, the degree to which there turns into a sort of mixture and confusion that is properly speaking unnameable, everything that Theodore Reik ends up with at the final term in his last chapter.

這樣一種直覺，類比地處理符號，讓解釋者處於某種的限制，被剝除掉所有的標準，這樣才不會同時出現這個可伸縮的程度，轉變成為一種混合及混淆的程度。適當地說，就是無法命名的一切東西。那是希奧德、雷克在他的最後一個章節，最後這個術語的結論。

To give you an idea of it, I will only indicate to you that these points, step by step and through the intermediary precisely of the ram’s horn, of the indication which
is given to us by this of what is quite obvious, of the
underpinning, more exactly of the correlation, why not say for that matter of the conflict with a whole reality, with a whole social totemic structure in the midst of which the whole historical adventure of Israel is plunged.

為了讓你們瞭解這個觀念，我只要給你們指出這幾點，逐步地，確實憑藉羊角號的仲介，顯而易見的內涵是一些相關的基礎。就那件事情而言，我不妨更確實地說，它們是整個現實界的衝突的指標。這種跟整個社會的圖騰式的結構的衝突。以色列歷史的整個冒險，就是投入這樣的圖騰結構當中。

How, along what path, how does it happen that no barrier stops Reik in his analysis to prevent him at the end from identifying Yahwe with the golden calf?

沿著怎樣的探討途徑，當雷克從事他的分析時，他如何避開阻礙，而獲得這樣的結論，將耶和華認同跟金小牛的功用？

Moses coming down from Sinai, radiating with the sublimity of the love of the father, had already killed him, and the proof, he tells us, is what he becomes: this veritable enraged being who is going to destroy the golden calf and make the Hebrews eat it in a powdered form. In this, of course, you will recognise the dimension of the totemic meal.

摩西從西奈過來，煥發著父親之愛的崇高。他已經殺死了耶和華。他告訴我們，證據就是他所成為的樣子：這位名符其實的憤怒的人，將要毀滅這隻金小牛，然後要希伯來人吃掉它，以粉狀的形式。當然，在這一點，你們會認出圖騰餐食的向度。

The strangest thing, is that since the requirements of the proof have to pass though the identification of Yahwe not with a calf, but with a bull, the calf in question will therefore necessarily represent a son divinity alongside a father-divinity.

最奇怪的是，這個證據要求將耶和華不是認同于小牛，而是認同于公牛。受到質疑的小牛，因此必須代表子之神，跟父之神並列。

We were told about the calf only to confuse the issue, to leave us in ignorance of the fact that there was also a bull. So therefore, since Moses here is the son, murderer of the father, what Moses has destroyed in the calf through the sequence of all the displacements followed in a way that quite obviously makes us sense that we lack any reference points, any compass capable of orientating us, this is supposed to be therefore Moses’ own ensign: everything is consumed in a sort of self-destruction. This is only indicated to you, I am only giving you here a certain number of points which show you the extremes at which a certain form of analysis can arrive by its excesses. We will have other examples in the (6) lectures which follow.

我們聽說有關這隻小牛，只是我們混淆這個問題，使我們無知於這個事實：也還有公牛存在。因此，在此的這位摩西是兒子，是弑父兇手。摩西透過所有的替代的系列，在小牛身上所毀滅的是，遵照一種方式。這種方式顯而易見，讓我們感覺到，我們欠缺任何的指稱點，任何能夠跟我們指明方向的羅盤。因此，這應該是摩西自己的旗幟：每一樣東西，都以一種自我毀滅的方式消耗。這就是他跟我們的指示。我在此只是給予你們某些的要點，跟你們指出它們的極端。在極端的地方，某些形式的分析能夠藉由它的極端到達。我們將會有其他的例子，在隨後的講演。

For our part, we are going to see what seems to us to deserve to be retained here, and for this reason to know, to know what we are searching for, this is what emerges from what I was
introducing earlier as constituting the necessity of our
research, namely not to abandon what in a certain text, which is none other, after all, than the foundational text of a society, my own, the one which is the reason why I am here in the position of giving you this teaching: the fact is that in the principle which determines the very necessity of a teaching, if there is in the first place the necessity of correctly situating psychoanalysis among the sciences, this can only happen by submitting its technique to the examination of what it really presupposes and accomplishes.

就我們而言，我們將會看出，我們在此似乎應該要有所保留。理由是，我們想要知道，知道我們正在尋求什麼。這是當我早先所指出，作為我們研究的必須的內涵，所出現的東西。換句話說，我們不應該放棄在某些文本，畢竟，那道道地地就是一個社會的基本文本，我自己的社會的基本文本。這個文本就是為什麼我在此，處於給予你們教學的立場。事實上，在決定一種教學的需要的原則上，首先就有必要，正確定位精神分析學為科學的一種。精神分析學要成為一門科學，必須要提出它的技術，接受它預先假定及完成的審查。

As regards this text, I indeed have the right to remember that I had to defend it and to impose it, even if those after all who allowed themselves to be drawn along by it saw in it perhaps
nothing but empty words. This text appears to me to be
fundamental; for what this technique presupposes and accomplishes in fact is our supporting point, the one around which we ought to make revolve the whole arrangement, even the structural one, of what we have to deploy.

關於這個文本，我確實擁有這個權利記住，我必須保衛它，賦加它，即使畢竟那些容許他們自己被它所吸引的人，在裏面看出，或許僅是一些空泛的字眼。對於我而言，這個文本似乎是基本的，因為這個技術預先假定及完成的，事實上，就是我們的支持點。環繞著這個支援點，我們應該運轉整個的安排，甚至是結構上的安排，對於我們所必需運作的東西。

If we overlook the fact that what is involved in our technique,
is a handling, an interference, indeed at the limit a
rectification of desire, but which leaves entirely open and in suspense the notion of desire itself and which necessitates its perpetual putting in question, we will undoubtedly, on the one hand wander about in the infinite network of the signifier or, going back to the beginning, relapse into the most ordinary paths of traditional psychology.

假如我們忽略這個事實，我們精神分析技術所牽涉的，是一種處理，一種介入。的確，應用到極限，它是一種欲望的矯正。但是它會將欲望本身的觀念，完全攤開及懸置。它也使永遠的質疑成為需要。無可置疑的，在一方面，我們將會漂泊在意符的無限網路裏，或是回到開始的地方時，會重新陷入傳統心理學的日常的窠臼。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com