Desire 014 Jacques Lacan

Desire 014

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK VI
Desire and its Interpretation
欲望及其解釋
1958 – 1959

Seminar 2: 19 November 1958

This discourse, the discourse therefore which is formulated at the level of the second stage, and which is the same discourse as always – we only arbitrarily distinguish the two stages – this discourse which as always is the discourse of the other, even when it is the subject who pronounces it, is fundamentally at this second stage an appeal to be that is more or less forceful, (17) it always contains, and here again we have one of the marvellous homophonique equivocations that French contains, it always contains more or less a soit, in other words a fiat, a fiat which is the source and the root of what beginning from the tendency, becomes and is inscribed for the speaking being in the
register of willing, or again of the I, in so far as it is divided into the two terms that have been studied of the one and the other, of the imperative, of the “take up thy bed and walk” which I spoke about above, or in relation to the subject, of the
setting up of his own ego.

因此，這個真理論述，在第二個階段的層次被說明的真理論述，它跟平常的真理論述一樣。我們只是任意地區別這兩個階段。像平常一樣，這個真理論述就是大它者的真理論述。即使當它是宣佈它的生命主體。他基本上是處於這第二階段，一種或多或少訴諸於強迫的力量。它總是包含，在此我們再一次擁有法文包含，一個神奇的同音異義的曖昧詞。它總是包含大約是一個「指令」，換句話說，是「命令」。這個命令是這個來源跟根源，從這個傾向開始，言談的生命主體成為及被銘記的東西，在意志的層次，或是這個「我」的層次。它被區分成為曾經被研究的兩個術語。其中一個是這個命令的術語，「捲起鋪蓋走路」這個術語。當我談論以上的術語，跟生命主體相關，跟他自己的自我的建立相關。

You see now the level at which there must be placed the question, as I might put it, the one which the last time I articulated here in the form of the Che vuoi? This Che vuoi?, which is, as one might say, the response of the other to this act of speech of the
subject, this question responds, I would say that as always this response responds before the question to the following, to the redoubtable question in which my schema articulates this very act of speech. Does the subject, when he is speaking, know what he is doing? This is precisely what we are in the process of asking here, and it is as a reply to this question that Freud said no.

你們現在看出，這個問題必須被擺放的這個層次。我不妨這樣說，上一次，我在此以這個「你到底想要什麼」的形式，表達的問題。我們不妨這樣說，這個「你到底想要什麼」，就是大它者對於生命主體的言談行動的這個回應。這個問題在做回應。我將會說，像平常一樣，這個回應在這個問題之前回應以下，回應著的這個再三重複的問題。以這個問題，我的基模表達言談的這個行動。當生命主體在言談時，他知道他正在做什麼？這確實是我們在此正在詢問的東西。它對於佛洛伊德否定的問題，充當一個回答。

The subject, in the act of speaking, and in so far as this act of speaking of course goes well beyond just his word, because his whole life is captured in acts of speech, because his life as (18) such, namely all his actions, are symbolic actions if only
because they are recorded, they are subject to being recorded, they are often actions to register something, and after all, everything that he does as they say, is contrary to what happens, or more exactly just like everything that happens before the
examining magistrate, everything that he does can be held against him, all his actions will be imposed on a context of language and that his very gestures are gestures which are never anything but gestures chosen in a pre-established ritual, namely in an
articulation of language.

生命主體正在言談的行動中。當然，言談的這個行動完全超越他的文字，因為他整個的生命被套陷於言談的行動，因為他的生命本身，換句話說，所有他的行動，都是符號象徵的行動。只有當它們被記錄，它們隸屬於被記錄，它們往往是記錄某件東西的行動。畢竟，他所做的每一件事，如人們所說，都是跟事實發生的相反，更加確實地說，就像是每一件事情，都發生在檢查的法官之前。每一樣他所做的事情，都被用來對他不利。所有他的行動，都被賦加在一個語言的內涵裏。他的姿態從來不是別的，道道地地就是儀式建立之前，就被選擇的姿態。換句話說，在語言的表達之前。

And Freud, to this; “Does he know what he is doing”? replies no. It is nothing else that is expressed by the second stage of my graph, namely that this second stage only takes on its importance from the question of the other, namely Che vuoi?, what do you
want, that up to the time of that question we remain of course in a state of innocence and foolishness.

對於這個問題：「他知道他在做些什麼嗎？」佛洛伊德的回答是：不知道。我的欲望圖形的第二個階段表達的就是這個。換句話說，這個第二階段，只有從大它者的這個問題，換句話說，就是「你到底想要什麼」的這個問題，它才具有它的重要性。當然，一直到那個問題的時間，我們始終保持著無知跟愚蠢的狀態。

I am trying here to prove that didactics do not necessarily pass by way of foolishness. Obviously I cannot base myself on you to demonstrate this I

在此，我正在設法證明，教導啟發未必要通過愚蠢的階段。顯而易見的，我無法將我自己建立在你們身上，為了證明這個「我」。

It is therefore where the second stage of the schema, with respect to this question and in the responses, articulates where there are placed the points of intersection between the true discourse which is maintained by the subject and what manifests itself as willing (youloir) in the articulation of the word (19) where these points of intersection are placed, this is the whole mystery of this symbol which seems to be so opaque for some of you.

因此，關於這個問題跟這些回應，這個基模的第二個階段，表達這些交會點被放置在哪里，生命主體維持的真理論述，跟以文字的表達，證明它自己是願意之間的交會點。這些交會點被放置在文字那裏。這就是這個符號的整個神秘所在，因為這個符號對於你們一些人而言，是模糊的。

If this discourse which presents itself at this level as an appeal for being, is not what it seems to be, as we know from Freud, and this is what the second stage of the graph tries to show us. At first sight one can only be surprised that you do not recognise it, because what did Freud say, what are we doing every day, if not the following: showing that at this level, at the level of the act of the word, the code is given by something which is not the primitive demand, which is a certain relationship of the subject to this demand in so far as the subject has remained marked by its avatars.

假如這個真理論述呈現它自己在這個層次，作為生命實存的訴求，這並不是它惺惺作態，如同我們從佛洛伊德那裏得知。這就是這個圖形的第二階段設法跟我們顯示的。乍然一看，我們不免大吃一驚，你們並沒有認出它。因為佛洛伊德所說的，我們每一天所正在做的，難道不就是以下的顯示：在這個層次，在文字的行動的這個層次，符碼被某件東西所給予。這個某件東西並不是原始的要求，生命主體跟這個需求有某種的關係。生命主體始終被它的具體顯現所標示。

That is what we call the oral, anal and other forms of unconscious articulation, and this is why it does not seem to me to give rise to much discussion. I am speaking quite simply about the admission of the premises that we situate here at the level of the code.

那就是我們所謂的口腔期、肛門期、以及其他形式的無意識的表達。這就是為什麼我似乎並沒有引起許多的非議。我相當單純地談論到這些假設前提的被承認，我們在此定位在符碼的這個層次。

The formula: the subject qua marked by the signifier in the presence of his demand as giving the material, the code of this true discourse which is the true discourse of being at this level.

這個公式是：生命主體作為被意符所標示，在他的要求之前，給予這個材料，這個真實的真理論述的符碼。這是這個層次的生命實存的真實的真理論述。

As regards the message that he receives, this message – I already alluded to it several times – I gave it many forms, all of them, not without good reason, more or less slippery, since this is the (20) whole problem of the analytic perspective, namely what is this message. I can leave it for today, and at this moment at least of my discourse, at the problematical stage, and symbolize it by a presumed signifier as such. It is a purely hypothetical form, it is an X, a signifier, a signifier of the Other because
it is at the level of the Other that the question is posed of a different mark, of a part which is precisely the problematical element in the question concerning this message.

關於他接收到這個訊息，這個訊息，我已經提到它好幾次。我給予它好幾種形式，所有這些形式多少有點滑溜不定，不是沒有理由。因為這是精神分析學觀點的整個問題所在。換句話說，我今天能夠留下它的這個訊息是什麼？至少，在我的真理論述的這個時候，在這個問題棘手的這個階段，這個未知數的符號X，是一個意符，大它者的一個意符。因為就在大它者的這個層次，一個不同標記，一個部份標記的問題被提出。那確實就是這個問題棘手的因素，在有關這個訊息的這個問題。

Let us sum up. The situation of the subject at the level of the unconscious, as Freud articulates it, it is not I, it is Freud who articulates it, is that he does not know what he speaks with, one has to reveal to him the properly signifying elements of his discourse, and that he does not know either the message which really comes to him at the level of the discourse of being, let us say truly if you like, but I in no way object to really.

讓我們作個總結。處於無意識的層次，生命主體的情況，如佛洛伊德所表達，並不是這個「我」，這是佛洛伊德所表達。生命主體的情況是，他不知道他在用什麼東西言談？我們必須跟他顯示，他的真理論述的適當意符化的因素。他也不知道這個訊息，在生命實存的真理論述的層次，真正來到他那裏的訊息。容我們真實地說，但是我真的一點兒也不反對。

In other words, he does not know the message that comes to him from the response to his demand in the field of what he wants.

換句話說，他並不知道來到他那裏的這個訊息，從對於他的要求的回應，在他所要的那個領域。

You already know the response, the true response: it can be only one, namely the signifier of nothing other, which is specially deputed precisely to designate the relationships of the subject to the signifier.

你們已經知道，這個回應，這個真實的回應：它只能是一個，換句話說，它道道地地就是這個意符，特別被指明，確實是要指明生命主體跟這個意符的關係。

I have told you, I want to express it all the same, why this signifier was the phallus. I would ask even those who are (21) hearing it for the first time, to accept this provisionally.

我曾經告訴你們，我仍然要表達它，為什麼這個意符是陽具。我甚至要求那些人，第一次聽到這種說法的人，暫時接受這樣的說法

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