Desire 019 Jacques Lacan

Desire 019

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 3 ; 26 November 1958

But if this is still not enough for you, I will complete this parenthesis because I want to do it to recall to you on what the associationist theory is founded, and on the basis of this experience, what happens afterwards, what is coordinated in the mind of a subject at such a level, where to take up again the exploration as it is carried on in this first experimental relationship, the elements, the atoms, the ideas as they say, no
doubt approximately, inadequately, this first relationship, presents itself, not without reason, in this form.

但是假如你們覺得這樣還不足夠，我將完成這個括弧，因為我想要做它，為了提醒你們，有關聯想主義的理論建立在什麼基礎之上。在這個經驗的基礎，後來發生什麼事？一個生命主體的心靈，在這樣的層次，是什麼被協調？當它被執行，在這個第一次的試驗性地關係，要到哪里去重新從事這樣的探索？這些元素，這些原子，如他們所說的，這些觀念，無可置疑的，只是大約，而且不充份。這個關係，以這個形式呈現它自己，不是沒有理由。

How, we are told, do these ideas make their entry at the origin?

我們被告知，這些觀念是如何進入到這個起源？

It is a question of relationships of continuity. Go and see, follow the texts, see what is spoken about, the examples on which it is based, and you will recognise perfectly that the continuity is nothing other than this discursive Combination on which there is based the effect that we call here metonymy. Continuity no doubt between two things which have arisen in so far as they are (10) evoked in memory on the plane of laws of association.

問題是連續性的關係。前去瞧一瞧，遵照這些文本，去瞧一瞧，他們談論些什麼？以它作為基礎的這些例子，你們就會清楚地體會到：這個連續性道道地地就是「推論性的結合」。在裏面，我們所謂的「換喻」的效果，就被建立在那裏。無可置疑，處於兩件東西之間的繼續性。這兩樣東西的出現，因為它們在記憶中被召喚，在聯想到法則的層次。

What does that mean? This signifies how an event has been lived in a context which we could broadly speaking call a random context. A part of the event having been evoked, the other will come to mind constituting an association of continuity, which is
nothing other than an encounter. What does that mean? That means in sum that it is broken up, that its elements are caught up in the same narrative text. It is in so far as the event evoked in memory is a narrated event, that the narration forms its text, that we can speak at this level about continuity.

那是什麼意思？這指示著：一個事件如何在一個情境裏被經歷，廣義地說，這個情境我們能夠稱為所任意的情境。事件的一部分曾經被召喚，我們將會聯想到另外一個事件，組成一種繼續性的聯想。這道道地地就是邂逅。那是什麼意思？總之，那意味著：它被中斷，它的元素被套陷在相同的描述的文本裏。當這個事件在記憶中被召喚，它是一個被描述的事件。但是這種描述組成它的文本，我們能夠在這個層次談論有關連續性。

A continuity moreover which we distinguish for example in a word-association experiment. One word will come with another:

而且，這個連續性，例如，我們在文字的聯想的試驗中所區別的連續性。一個字會跟隨一個字而來。

If in connection with the word “cherry” I evoke obviously the word “table”, this will be a relationship of continuity because on such a day there were cherries on the table.

假如關於「櫻桃」這個字，顯而易見地，我召喚「桌子」這個字。這會形成一種連續性的關係，因為在這樣的一天，有櫻桃放在桌子上。

But a relationship of continuity if we speak of something which is nothing other than a relationship of similarity. Even a relationship of similarity, is also always a relationship of signifiers in so far as the similarity is the passage from one to the other by a similarity which is a similarity of being, which is a similarity of one to the other, between one and the other in so far as one being different to the other, there is some subject (11) of being which makes them alike.

但是這是一種連續性，假如我們談論到某件道道地地就是類似的關係。即使它是一種類似的關係，它也總是一種意符的關係。因為這個類似，就是從一個意符到另外一個意符的傳遞過程，由於一種類似，那是生命實存的一種類似。那是一個意符到另外一個意符的類似，處於彼此之間。一個生命的實存不同於另外一個生命的實存，有某個生命實存的主體，使他們看起來相同。

I am not going to go into the whole dialectic of the same and the other, with all its difficulties and the infinitely greater richness than there appears there at first glance. I refer those who are interested in this to Parmenides, and they will see that they will spend some time there before exhausting the question.

我不想要進入相同與不同的整套辯證法，由於它的困難重重，以及它遠比我們乍看之下，來得更加複雜萬分。我推薦那些對此感到興趣的人，去閱讀巴門尼底斯。他們將會看出，他們會花費一些時間，在窮盡這個問題之前。

What I am simply saying here and what I want you to experience, is, because I spoke above about cherries, that in connection with this word there are other usages besides the metonymical usage, I would say precisely to serve a metaphorical usage, I can use it to speak about lips saying that these lips are like cherries, and give the word “cherry” as a word-association in connection with the word “lip”.

我在此僅要說的，以及我想要你們經驗到的是：因為我以上談論到櫻桃，關於這個字，除了換喻的用法外，還有其他用法。我確實地說，為了服務一個比喻的用法。我能夠使用它，談論到嘴唇：這些嘴唇看起來像櫻桃，然後給予「櫻桃」這個字，當著是一種字的聯想，關於「嘴唇」這個字。

Why are they linked here? Because they are both red, alike in some of their attributes. It is not just this, or because they both have the same form analogically, but
what is quite clear, is that whatever is happening, we are immediately, and this can be sensed, in the quite substantial effect which is called the metaphorical effect. There is no kind of ambiguity whatsoever when I speak in a word-association experiment of cherries in connection with lips.

在此，為什麼它們有關聯？因為它們兩個都是紅色，在它們的某些屬性，它們相同。不僅是如此，或者是因為它們兩者都有相同的類似形狀。而且顯而易見的，無論發生什麼事，我們能夠感覺到，我們立刻處於這個相當實質的結果，所謂比喻的結果。這中間根本沒有模糊曖昧，當我用一個字的聯想的試驗談論櫻桃跟嘴唇的關係。

We are on the plane of the metaphor in the most substantial sense that is included in this effect, this term, and on the most formal plane, (12) this always presents itself as I have reduced it for you to a metaphorical effect, to an effect of substitution in the
signifying chain.

我們處於比喻的層次，以最實質的意涵。這個意涵被包括在這個效果，這個術語。在最正式的層次，這個總是會呈現它自己，當我替你們將它化簡到比喻的效果，在意符鎖鏈的代替的效果。

It is in so far as the cherry can be put into a structural context or not in connection with the lip, that the cherry is there. At which point, you could say to me: the cherry can come into connection with the lips in a function of continuity; the cherry has disappeared between the lips, or she has given me a cherry to take on my lips. Yes, of course it can also present itself like that, but what is in question? It is a question here
of a continuity which precisely is that of the narrative that I spoke about above, because the event in which this continuity is integrated, and which brings it about that the cherry is in fact for a short time in contact with the lips, is something which of
course from the real point of view, should not deceive us. It is not that the cherry has touched the lips which is important, it is that it is swallowed; in the same way it is not the fact that it is held between the lips in the erotic gesture I evoked, it is that it is offered to us in this erotic movement itself which counts.

當櫻桃能夠被放進一個結構的內涵，關於跟嘴唇的關係，櫻桃就在那裏。在哪一點，你們能夠跟我說，櫻桃能夠進入跟嘴唇的關聯，以連續性的功用？櫻桃已經消失在兩片嘴唇中間？或是她給我一粒櫻桃，為了瞧瞧我的嘴唇？是的，當然，它也能夠呈現它自己像那樣，但是什麼受到質疑？在此，這是一個連續性的問題，確實就是描述性的問題，我以上所提到的。因為這個事件，連續性被合併在裏面的這個事件，並且導致它的發生。事實上，這個櫻桃跟這兩個嘴唇有段短時間的接觸，當然從真實的觀點來說，這是不應該有任何欺騙的事。重要的，倒不是櫻桃碰觸到嘴唇，而是櫻桃被吞下去。如同在我召喚的這個情欲的姿態，重要的，不是它被含在兩片嘴唇的中間這個事實，重要的是，它被提供給予我們，以這樣情欲挑逗的動作。

If for an instant we stop this cherry in contact with the lips it is in function of a flash which is precisely a short exposure of the narrative, in which it is the sentence, or it is
the words which for an instant suspend this cherry between the lips, and it is moreover precisely because this dimension of (13) narrative exists in so far as it establishes this flash, that inversely this image in so far as it is created by the suspension of the narrative, effectively becomes on this occasion one of the stimulants of desire to the degree that in imposing a tone which is only here the implication of the language of the act, language introduces retrospectively into the act this stimulation, this stimulating element properly speaking which is arrested as such and which comes on this occasion to nourish the act itself through this suspension which takes on the value of the phantasy, which has an erotic signification in the detour of the act.

假如我們停止這個櫻桃跟嘴唇接觸的瞬間，它就具有閃現的功用。這個閃現的功用，確實就是描述的短暫的曝露。在描述裏，這個句子，或這些文字，有那麼一瞬間，懸置這粒櫻桃在兩片嘴唇之間。而且，確實是因為這個描述的向度存在，它建立了這個閃現。逆轉過來說，當這個意象被描述的懸置所創造，在這個場合，它有效地變成欲望的一種刺激，到達這個程度，當我們賦加一種語調，這個語調在此暗示著，這個行動的語言。語言會反動地介紹這個刺激到行動裏。適當地說，這種刺激的元素本身會被擄獲，在這個場合，會前來滋養這個行動的本身，透過這層懸置。這層懸置具有幻見的價值，而幻見具有一個情欲的意義，在這個行動的迂迴裏。

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