Archive for November, 2007

Cool Memories 03

November 26, 2007

Cool Memories 003

By Jean Baudrillard 布希亞

Translated by Springhero 雄伯

  Revolution—including the revolution of desire—is even less kind to those who think it has already happened than to those who oppose it. Thus it is not the Revolution which will turn me into a woman. That will come about by my espousing here and now—passionately—the position of femininity itself. Now for feminists this is unpardonable. For this position is more feminine, with all the supreme femininity it implies, than that of women will ever be.

   革命,包括慾望的革命,對於認為革命已經成功的人甚至於更加殘酷,勝過於對於反革命份子。因此,這不是會將我轉變成為女人的革命。除非我將女性主義的立場,此地跟此時激情地結合在一起。就女性主義而言,這是不可原諒的。因為這個立場意謂著女性優越,比女性未來的立場更加女性化。

  In the general sexual confusion that reigns among, it is almost a miracle to belong to your own sex ( Emile) .

  就我們一般人受到性別支配的混淆而言,要屬於你自己的性別還真是個奇蹟。(艾彌耳)

  Women are like historical events; they happen once in our lives as events and they are then entitled to a second existence as farce. The event of seduction, the farce of psychology. The event of passion, the farce of the work of mourning.

  Fortunately, it is the same the other way round. You very probably have the good fortune to enjoy a second existence in the minds of the women you have known, as melancholy farce.

   女人就像歷史事件;她們在我們人生中發生過一次當著事件,然後她們就有資格再一次存在當著鬧劇。誘拐的事件,心理學的鬧劇。激情的鬧劇,哀悼運作的鬧劇。

   幸運地,顛倒過來說也是一樣。你很可能足夠幸運在你所認識的女人心中,享受到第二次的存在,當著憂鬱的鬧劇。

   By a single nuance, a single word charged with unconscious hatred, you know it’s over. And yet you have to go right on to the end, with all the vicissitudes of love and their twisting psychological paths. None of that has any other meaning than to bring you back to the first moment, when you saw in a blinding flash that the break had come.

   憑藉細微差別,即使一個字眼都夾雜無意識的怨恨,你知道真情不再。可是你仍然必須將戲演到底,包括戀愛的情緒起伏以及曲折的心路歷程。這一切其實沒有其他意義,除了要將你帶回最初的那一刻,當你在盲目的閃光中,看到裂隙已經來臨。

   Such is the pathos of our psychology: everything is there right at the beginning, in a single feature, a single gesture, all of whose consequences will have to be played out to the finish. But the unfolding of these will change nothing. The only use of all this is to provide the gods with a spectacle of time. And psychology is merely a discursive convulsion, when things have really occurred long before in the cursive mode of the single stroke that effects them.

   我們心理的感傷力是如此強烈:開始的每一件事都宛然猶在,一個特色,一個姿態,所有結局都必須從頭到尾演完。但是這些結局的展開並沒有改變什麼。唯一的用途就是提供眾神欣賞歷史重演的景象。心理學僅是散漫的痙攣,當事件其實早已發生過,就像是因果關係一氣呵成的模式。

  Philosophy and psychology died at the same moment as “ the other”, and the desire for the other, died. Only the empty sign of their concept shines out now, in a sky devoted to the mental simulacrum and the pataphysical comfort of our great cities.

  哲學和心理學跟「它者」同時死亡。對於「它者」的欲望也死亡。目前只有他們觀念的空洞符號依舊閃亮在精神虛擬的天空,以及我們類似安逸的大都會中。

  Urbino Gubbio Mantua.

  The beauty of these low doors opening on to successive rooms, the slipping of these perfect rectangles one inside the other. A violent eroticism produced by the geometric and hierarchical regularity of the buildings. Moving from one room to another, changing spaces is erotic. Not sexual; but belonging to that ideality of seduction in which the difference between the sexes appears like a subtle and aesthetic due to the duality of things, an innovation, a surprise before the Manichean violence of sex irrupts.

   這些低門檻的美麗通往鱗次的房間,這些完美的矩形房間櫛比而立。這些建築物呈現幾何學及階層的規律性讓人有強烈情慾的遐想。從一個房間走到另一個房間,轉換空間就令人怦然心動。不是性慾的心動,而是屬於誘拐的理念化。在此,性別的差異似乎像一個微妙的美學線索,以性的雙重暴力大量迸發,讓我們體悟到事情的雙重性,創新及驚喜。

   The real is not threatened by its double today ( Clement Rosset) : it is threatened by its very idiocy.

   克列門、羅協說:今天真理並不是受到本身雙重性的威脅,而是受到自身大智若愚的威脅。

    The Gift ( too moral, too Christian)

    Expenditure ( too Romantic, too transgressive, too aesthetic)

    Desire ( too energetic, too repressed, too liberating)

    Debt ( nothing can be redeemed—too religious)

        All the analytico-revolutionary utopias revolve around these four “ concept” which reverberate with one another.

        Some heresies are more paradoxical. Sovereignty ( Bataille), cruelty ( Artaud), the simulacrum ( Klossowski). Seduction.

    禮物(太道德,太基督教)

    消耗(太浪漫,太揮霍,太美學)

    慾望(太精力充沛,太壓抑,太解放)

    債務(無法贖回,太宗教化)

        分析哲學及革命理念所建造的烏托邦,就繞著這四個「觀念」互相激盪。

        有些異端更加矛盾,如巴岱爾的主體自主,阿圖得的殘酷劇場,克羅梭斯基的虛擬幻境。通通都是誘拐。

    The beauty of the Aztec myth: it is by their death that the gods, one by one, give birth to light, the stars , the sky, the earth and men.

     阿芝克神話的美麗在於:眾神以犧牲死亡,一一產生光輝、星辰、天空、地球和人類。

     Just as the migration of the Guayaki carried off the surplus population, in a state of quasi-suicidal exaltation, to the edges of the ocean where they disappeared, analysis carries off concepts to the limit point of their absolute reversibility, to their resolution in the oceanic form of a vertiginous metaphor that absorbs them.

   正如冠亞基人的遷移帶走多餘的人口,類似自殺的壯烈,到世界的邊緣然後失蹤,分析哲學也將理念無限上綱,推到絕對無法回轉,用令他們著迷的汪洋大海般的暈眩隱喻,推到永劫。

   Warm and soft and subtle: the body before lovemaking.

   Fresh, soft and ductile: the flesh of seduction.

   Mobile and violent and metaphysical: the form of the face.

   Gentle and weary and subtle: the body after lovemaking.

   溫馨、柔順、微妙:做愛前的身體

   新鮮、柔順、依偎:誘拐的肉體

   蠕動、猛烈、隱喻:臉部形狀

   溫和、疲倦、微妙:做愛後的身體

   

  What was polar and axial has become orbital and nuclear.

   What was historical and genetic has become tactical and a media event

   What was perspectival and relational has become tactile and involutive.

   What was final and causal has become aleatory.

    原來的兩極和軸心已經成為軌道跟核心。

    原來的歷史和基因已經成為觸覺跟媒體事件。

    原來的宏觀和相對已經成為觸覺跟退化。

    原來的最終和因果已經成為因緣巧合。

p7—p8

Cool Memories by Jean Baudrillard 布希亞

Translated by Springhero 雄伯

https://springhero.wordpress.com

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Cool Memories 02

November 25, 2007

Cool Memories 002

By Jean Baurdrillard 布西亞

Translated by Springhero 雄伯

    Anyway we are condemned to social coma, political coma, historical coma. We are condemned to an anesthetized disappearance, to a fading away under anaesthesia. If that’s the case, better to feel ourselves dying, even in the convulsions of terrorism, than to disappear like ectoplasms which no one, even desensitized, will want to conjure up later to give themselves a fright.

    如論如何,我們被判決是定社會昏迷、政治昏迷、歷史昏迷。我們被判決是麻醉地消失,在麻醉地淡出。既然如此,我們在恐怖主義的災變下,不如覺得自己早奄奄待斃,也不要像幽魂般消失。眾生麻木不仁,誰也不想召喚我們一息尚存的幽魂,驚嚇自己。

   You never know what it is that seduces you. What you are sure of is that this was meant for you. There is no other feeling that brings with it such a sense of clear self-evidence. Something has your name on it, irrevocably and at a single stroke—you have the chance to dispense with the abominable psychological labor to which we are condemned even more surely than we are condemned to social labor, and to enter total absolution.

  

   你永遠無法知道誘拐你的是什麼。你所能確定的是這個誘拐是為你而設。沒有其它感覺像這個誘拐你的感覺那樣不言而喻。某處鐫刻你的大名,一筆寫成,抹除不掉。我們更加確定是被判決一生要盡可怕的心理苦役,遠甚過被判決要服社會苦役。其實,在一了百了的免除之前,你有機會自行免除。

   During the making of a porn film, one of the girls—blonde with a black velvet neckband—goes through all the various acts without a change of expression. Her indifference is seductive.

   In the middle of the reveries, a man whispers into the woman’s ear: What are you doing after the orgy?”

   在色情影片拍攝過程,一位配戴黑色天鵝絨項鍊的女孩經歷各種動作,表情不變。她的冷漠是誘拐。

    高潮中,男人在女人耳邊竊竊私語:「狂歡過後,你要做什麼?」

    It is not the figure of seduction that is mysterious, but that of the subject tormented by his own desire or his own image.

    神秘的不是誘拐的人物,而是主體為自己的慾望或自己的形象所折磨。

    Death too becomes conspicuous by its absence.

    死亡也因為隱而不見而更加昭然若揭。

    Marvelous, enchanting mobility, aerial alertness: cats.

    All seduction is feline. It is as though appearances had begun working on their own and were unfolding effortlessly.

    Felinity of appearances. All unfolding smoothly, without disruption. For felinity is simply the sovereign unfolding of the body and movement.

    神奇、迷人的扭轉、警覺四望,猶如貓。

    所有的誘拐像貓般狡黠,好像表象早已經自行運作,然後輕而易舉地展開。

    表象像貓般狡黠,展開過程流暢,不曾中斷。就像貓的屬性是身體跟動作的展開控制自如。

    Better than those women who climax are those who give the impression of climaxing, but maintain a sort of distance and virginity beneath the pretence of pleasure, for they oblige us with the offer of rape.

   

    女人與其達到高潮,不如顯出高潮的表情,但是在愉悅的偽裝下,卻依舊維持貞潔與距離,這樣才能示我們以受強暴之惠。

    Depth isn’t what it used to be. For if the nineteenth century witnessed the long process of the destruction of appearances and their supplanting by meaning, the twentieth, subsequently, saw an equally massive process of the destruction of meaning…and its replacement by what? We find pleasure neither in appearances no in meaning.

   

   深度感不再是以前的樣子。假如十九世紀見證到表象受到毀滅的漫長過程,以及表象被意義所取代,二十世紀隨之而來看到意義受到毀滅的同樣慘烈的過程。但是替代意義的什麼?在表象及意義中,我們均無法找到愉悅。

    Lacan is right: language doesn’t convey meaning. It stands in place of meaning. But the results produced are not effects of structure, but seduction effects. Not a law which regulates he play of signifiers, but a rule which ordains the play of appearances.    But perhaps all this means the same thing.

    拉崗說得沒錯:語言沒有傳達意義。語言替代意義位置。但是造成的結果不是結構的效果,而是誘拐的效果。

    When things reach that apogee where they clarity and resolve themselves, they then with equal suddenness become unintelligible and ungraspable.

    當事情自行澄清和解構到達極點,同樣突然地,他們反而變得不知所云,無法理解。

   

    There are cultures which can only picture their origins and not their ends.

    有些文化只能想像其起源,而不是其目的。

    Some are obsessed with both.

    Two other positions are possible: only picturing one’s end—our own culture; picturing neither beginning nor end—the coming culture.

    有些文化著迷於起源跟目的。

    其他兩個位置是可能的:其一是只想像自己的目的,我們自己文化的目的;另一是既不要想像未來文化的開始,也不要想像其目的。

p5—p6

Cool Memories by Jean Baudrillard 布希亞

Translated by Springhero 雄伯

https://springhero.wordpress.com

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

    

Cool Memories 01

November 25, 2007

Cool Memories 001 涼爽的記憶

By Jean Baurdrillard 布希亞

Translated by Springhero 雄伯

The initial stunning impact of the deserts and California is gone, and yet, to be fair, is there anything more beautiful in the world? It seems unlikely. I have to assume, then, that I have come across—once in my life—the most beautiful place I shall ever see. It is just as reasonable to suppose I have also met the woman whose beauty stunned me most and whose loss wounded me most. A second eventuality of the same order is unlikely—in any case the freshness, the artlessness of the event would be lost. It is just as probable that I have also written the one—or two—best books I shall ever write. They are done with. That is how things go. And it is most unlikely that a second bust of inspiration will alter this irreversible fact.

初臨加州沙漠所感受的震撼已經消失,可是持平地說,世界上有比此地更美麗的地方嗎? 似乎不可能。因此我必須承認,在我一生中有一次,我終於遇到難得一見的最美麗的地方。猶如我可以振振有理說,我也曾遇見過最令我驚豔美麗的女人,雖然分手時傷害也最重。相同情事的結局重演一遍絕無可能。無論如何,那種新鮮感、那種情事的質樸自然將不再重來。我也可以這樣說,我現在所已經寫的這一兩本書是我的曠世傑作。我大功告成。我嘔心瀝血。就算我再一次靈感泉湧,那種嘔心瀝血之感不可能再逆轉回來。

    This is where the rest of life begins.

    But the rest is what is given to you as something extra, and there is a charm and a particular freedom about letting just anything come along, with the grace—or ennui—of a later destiny.

    這就是我餘生開始的地方。

    但是剩餘本來就是額外多給予你的東西,任由後來命運的播弄,都不在乎的魅力跟特別自由,優雅或倦怠均無不可。

    It is always possible to tell yourself that is not tomorrow but the day after which is the first day of the rest of your life, and that it is not this face or this landscape, but the one after. That is why the thirteenth is still the first—and always the only one.

    你也可以告訴自己:這並非明天,而是你餘生的後一天;這並非是此臉孔或此風景,而是餘生後的一個臉孔或風景。 

    The order of the world is always right—such is the judgment of God. For God has departed, but he has left this judgment behind, the way the Cheshire Cat left his grin.

    世界的秩序總是井然,這是上帝的判決。現在上帝已經離去,但是留下的判決依舊存在,就像「愛麗思歷險記」裡,那隻貓的獰笑猶存。

    Melancholy is just as much as affectation as joie de vivre—who is happy to be alive? Beings, like things, are naturally prostrate and only manage to seem happy by a superhuman effort, which has a great affectation in it, but this is more in line with the involution of things.

    憂鬱跟歡喜同樣都是人的情感,有誰只是快樂地活在世上?眾生跟萬物一樣,天性本是慵懶,只有憑藉超人般的努力,始能顯得快樂。超人般努力蘊涵強烈的情感,但是世事千頭萬緒,不得不如此以赴。

    There is a nostalgia in dialectics, in the work of Benjamin and Adorno for example. The most subtle dialectics always end in nostalgia . By contrast, and more profoundly ( in Benjamin and Adorno themselves) , there is a melancholy of the system which is incurable and invulnerable to dialectics. It is this melancholy which gaining the upper hand today, through ironically transparent forms.

   例如,在班傑明及阿德諾作品的辯證法中頗多懷舊。無論其辯證如何纖細微妙,終究歸結於懷舊。比較起來,對於班傑明及阿德諾自身而言,整個世界的系統就是有一種深深的憂鬱之感痊癒不了,卻也不受辯証法傷害。今天世界雖然更加透明,反諷地,這種憂鬱之感反而越是興旺。

   With the truth, you need to get rid of it as soon as possible and pass it on it someone else. As with illness, this is the only way to be cured of it. The person who keeps truth in his hands has lost.

   至於真理,你需要儘快廢除掉,轉手給別人。如同疾病,痊癒的唯一方法就是廢除它。手中緊握著真裡的人已經迷失。

https://springhero.wordpress.com

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Springhero雄伯

   

Toward a Principle of Evil

November 21, 2007

         Toward a Principle of Evil

             By Jean Baudrillard

 

Does these fatal strategies exist? It does not appear that       that I have described them, nor even touched upon them. The power of the real over the imagination is so great that such a hypothesis appears to be no more than a dream. Where do you get the stories you tell about the object? Objectivity is the opposite of fatality. The object is real, and the real is subject to laws, and that is that.

 

這些致命的策略存在嗎?我似乎尚未描述過、甚至尚未提起。真實勝過想像的力量是如此之大,這種假設看起來只是夢想。你對客體所說的故事從何而來?客觀真理的相反就是致命。客體是真理,而真理隸屬於法則,就是這麼一回事。

 

There it is: faced with a delirious world, only the ultimatum of realism will do. Which means that if you wish to escape the world’s insanity, you must sacrifice all of its charm as well. By increasing its delirium, the world has raised the stakes of the sacrifice, blackmailed by reality. Today, in order to survive, illusion no longer works; one must draw nearer to the nullity of the real.

 

就是這樣。面對幻覺的世界時,只有真實的最後通牒行得通。這意味著,假如你想要逃離世界的瘋狂,你也得犧牲所有世界的迷人之處。以提高幻覺的方式,世界也提高了你必須犧牲的賭金。今天,為了要活下去,僅靠幻覺是不足的,我們還必須更加接近真實的空無。

 

There is perhaps one, and only one, fatal strategy: theory. And undoubtedly the only difference between a banal theory and a fatal theory is that in the former the subject always believes itself to be more clever than the object, while in the latter the object is always taken to be more clever, more cynical, more ingenious than the subject, which it awaits at every turn.

 

可能只有一個致命的策略:理論。無疑地,過時理論跟致命理論之間唯一的不同是:前者主體總是相信自己較客體聰明,而後者客體總是被認為比主體更聰明、更狡猾、更有計謀,等著伺機撲殺過來。

 

The metamorphoses, tactics, and strategies of the object exceed the subject’s understanding. The object is neither the subject’s double nor his or her repression; neither the subject’s fantasy. It withholds one of the rules of the game which is inaccessible to the subject, nor because it is deeply mysterious, but because it endless ironic.

 

客體的蛻變、技倆、和策略是主體的理解力所望塵莫及。客體既非主體的雙重人,也非他或她的壓抑,或主體的幻想及幻覺,更非主體的鏡子或反射,而是有其自己的策略。客體堅守自己一套遊戲規則,儘管主體不得其門而入,這倒不是故做神秘,而是它本質上就是不斷地反諷。

 

An objective irony watches over us, it is the object’s fulfillment without regard for the subject, nor for its alienation. In the alienation phase, subjective irony is triumphant. Here the subject constitutes an unsolvable challenge to the blind world that surrounds him. Subjective irony, ironic subjectivity, is the finest manifestation of a universe of prohibition, of law and of desire. The subject’s power derives from a promise of fulfillment, whereas the realm of the object is characterized by what is fulfilled, and for that reason it is a realm we cannot escape.

 

客體的反諷監視著我們,這就是客體的實現,它不在乎主體如何作為,或自我異化。在異化的部分,主體的反諷板回一城,因為在異化中,主體組成一道難於攻克的挑戰,對於包圍它的盲目世界。主體的反諷,或反諷的主體化,巧妙地地證明了我們的宇宙處處都是法則與慾望的禁錮。主體的力量來自實現的承諾,而客體的國度特徵就是已經實現。因為這個理由,我們無法逃避這個國度。

  

Meditation

November 21, 2007

Meditation XVII   by John Donne

沉思錄

 

( The poet, confined to his bed with a serious illness, hears the bells of the church adjoining, and is thereby reminded of death and the transiency of human life.)

 

(詩人因為重疾臥病在床,聽到附近教堂喪鐘聲,因此聯想到死亡及生命的短暫。)

 

Perchance he for whom this bell tolls may be so ill, as that he knows not it tolls for him; and perchance I may think myself so much better than I am, as that they who are about me, and see my state, may have caused it to toll for me, and I know not that.

 

也許這喪鐘為他而敲的的人病勢沈重,以致不知此喪鐘為他而敲。也許我認為自己的病狀尚未如此惡化,以致我週遭的人,目睹我病入膏肓,為我敲起喪鐘,而我自己猶不自覺。

 

The church is catholic, universal, so are all her actions; all that she does belongs to all. When she baptizes a child, that action concerns me; for that child is thereby connected to that head which is my head too, and ingrafted into that body whereof I am a member.

 

教堂汎愛眾生,普及寰宇,其行為亦是如此,她所表現萬物莫不歸屬。教堂為小孩行浸信禮時,我亦有榮焉,因為小孩從此以後所屬之靈,亦是我所屬之靈,嵌

入他的肉身,猶如我參與其中。

 

And when she buries a man, that action concerns me; all mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated; God employs several translators; some pieces are translated by age, some by sickness. Some by war, some by justice; but God’s hand is in every translation, and his hand shall bind up all our scattered leaves again for that library where every book shall like open to one another.

 

教堂行葬禮時,那個行為與我息息相關,因為所有人類均為同一作者所創作,同在一本書之內。有人死亡,不是書本被撕掉一個章節,而是被翻譯成為更好的語言。每個章節均是如此翻譯。上帝使用各種翻譯方法,有些人因為衰老而被翻譯,有些因為疾病,有些因為戰爭,還有些因為司法判決。但是不論哪一種翻譯,上帝都參與其事。上帝親手將零散的頁冊重新整編成圖書館,在哪裡每本書歷歷在目地互相攤開。

 

As therefore the bell that rings to a sermon calls not upon the preacher only, but upon the congregation to come, so this bell calls us all; but how much more me, who are brought so near the door by this sickness. There was a contention as far as a suit ( in which both piety and dignity, religion and estimation, were mingled ), which of the religious orders should ring to prayers first in the morning; and it was determined, that they should ring first that rose earliest.

 

因此,傳道時敲響的鐘聲,不僅是召喚牧師,也是召喚會眾前來。所以鐘聲召喚我們大家,只是我因為疾病,距離死亡之門如此接近,更覺是為我而敲。

 

If we understand aright the dignity of this bell that tolls for our evening prayer, we would be glad to make it ours by rising early, in that application, that it might be ours as well as his, whose indeed it is. The bell does toll for him that thinks it does; and though it intermit again, yet from that minute that that occasion wrought upon him, he is united to Gold.

 

假如我們真的了解晚間祈禱響鐘的威嚴,我們當會在身歷其境時,很樂意視鐘聲為我們而敲,因而早起。因為鐘聲固然可能為他而敲,無可置疑,也可能為我們而敲,鐘聲確實是為了有自覺意識的人而敲。雖然期間有所中斷,從有自覺意識的那一時刻開始,他就與上帝結合相會。

 

Who casts not up his eyes to the sun when it rises? But who takes off his eyes from a comet when that breaks out? Who bends not his ear to any bell which upon any occasion rings? But who can remove it from that bell which is passing a piece of himself, out of this world!

 

當太陽上升時,誰能不仰首張望?可是當彗星隕落,誰會忍心掉首不顧?當其他場合鐘聲響起,誰不側耳傾聽?可是當喪鐘意味著我們歸屬的世界將減少一部份時,誰能冷漠地置若罔聞?

 

No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. It a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of the friend’s or of thine own were: any man’s death diminished me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

 

沒有人是島嶼,完全獨立;每個人都是大陸的一塊,整體的一部份。假如有一小塊被海水沖走,歐洲將因此而減少一塊,好像海岬少了一塊,或是你我朋友的田地減少了一塊。任何人的死亡都讓我若有所失,因為我參與整個人類的命運,因此不會袖手旁觀喪鐘為誰而響?喪鐘為你我而響!

 

Neither can we call this a begging of misery, or a borrowing of misery, as though we were not miserable enough of ourselves, but must fetch in more from the next house, in taking upon us the misery of our neighbors. Truly it were an excusable covetousness if we did, for affliction is a treasure, and scarce any man hath enough of it.

 

我們也不要稱這個叫訴諸悲慘,或濫情悲慘,好像我們自己還不夠悲慘似的,還要將隔壁房屋併入計算,將鄰居的悲慘攔在我們身上。的確,真的要這樣做,也沒有人會怪你貪得無饜,畢竟痛苦就像財寶,沒有幾個人會嫌其多多益善。

 

No man hath affliction enough that is not matured and ripened by it, and made fit for God by that affliction. If a man carry treasure in bullion, or in a wedge of gold, and have none coined into current money, his treasure will defray him as he travels. Tribulation is a treasure in the nature of it, but it is not current money in the use of it, except we get nearer and nearer our home, Heaven , by it.

 

人遭受的痛苦夠多,自然會因此而變得成熟而圓融,更因為痛苦而受上帝垂憐。

可是,假如一個人空有銀磚或金塊,卻沒有將他們鎔鑄成目前的貨幣,他的寶藏在人生之旅中將無法運用。苦難本身是財寶,但並非可以通用的貨幣,除非我們藉著它更加接近我們天堂的家園。

 

Another man may be sick too, and sick to death, and this affliction may lie in his bowels, as gold in a mine, and be of no use to him; but this bell, that tells me of his affliction, digs out and applies that gold to me: if by this consideration of another’s danger I take mine own into contemplation, and so secure myself, by making my recourse to my God, who is our only security.

 

別人可能也生病,正彌留死亡,這個痛苦正潛藏其內臟,猶如黃金潛藏礦坑,對他並無絲毫用途。但此喪鐘告訴我他的痛苦,將黃金挖掘出來,施用到我身上。假如考慮到別人垂危之際,我沉思到我自己的垂危,以求助於我們唯一的庇護,上帝,因而得的我的平安。

 

Aggressivity in Psychoanalysis

November 21, 2007

Aggressivity in psychoanalysis

By Jacques Lacan

That is to say, contrary to the dogmatism that is sometimes imputed to us, we know that this system remains open both as a whole and in several of its articulations.

   These gaps seem to focus on the enigmatic signification that Freud expressed in the term death instinct, which, rather like the figure of the Sphinx, reveals the aporia that confronted this great mind in the most profound attempt so far made to formuate an experience of man in the register of biology.

   This aporia likes at the heart of the notion of aggressivity, the importance of whose role in the economy of the psyche we are only just beginning.

  換句話說, 跟我們一般所接受的武斷教條不同的是: 佛洛依德學說不論整體 或片段, 均不預設立場。

  對於死亡本能這謎語一般的術語, 蠱惑魅影, 像人面獅身司芬克斯, 佛洛依德曾一再提起。 顯示佛洛依德這偉大的心靈 ,曾一再跟其遭遇接觸, 並深刻地企圖以生物學角度來銓釋人的死亡經驗。

  這就是為什麼, 精神分析的理論者, 對於死亡傾向的超心理層面, 曾不斷探索, 雖然難免矛盾百出 流於形式。

  論點一:攻擊性以主體主觀的經驗表現自己。

先談精神分析的現象。在涉及基本原理時,「自己」這一反身代名詞常受忽略。

可以說,精神分析是透過言詞溝通,也就是意義的表白理解,來發展。因此,它預先假定:有一主體對另一主體,意圖如此表白自己。

所以主觀性在所難免。儘管理論上,我們希望能像物理科學一樣,憑藉儀器記錄,精確可靠,減少主觀性。 事實上,判讀結果時,還是有個人解讀錯誤的可能。

只有主體能夠瞭解意義,反過來說,每個意義的現象意謂著有一主體在內。分析時,主體表達自己 當著可以被瞭解,事實上也有人正設法瞭解他。儘管主體的表達包含許多自己內心的告白,或自己都不知所以然的本能心理投射,精神分析學認為這些都是可以克服的困難。當然,實際上進行時,時常由於對話零亂,雞跟鴨講,會有重重困難。所幸,佛洛依德憑藉各種技巧,一一克服,貢獻良多。

這樣的成果可以當著是科學的基礎嗎?當然可以,只要這些經驗可以讓每個人驗證。也就是說:由兩個主體所構成的經驗,其中一位在對話過程,扮演超然、客觀的角色,結果認為是效果斐然,然後就證明:第三者對另一主體也可以如法炮製。這個方法深具創意,因為人同此心 心同此理,大家欣然接受,因為它建立在主觀性的互動之上。雖然這個互動經驗原先是局限於特定文化背景,後來一再衍生套用,仍然能產生普遍化、相對化的原則,能夠施用於眾人而皆準,那麼還是能合乎科學精神。

  

論點二:攻擊性是意圖的侵犯,越是蹂躪身體,越是表現攻擊的戰果輝煌。

精神分析的經驗使我們能感受到意圖的壓力。我們觀察:當病人拋開日常生活的防衛警覺,暢所欲言,或拒絕、或無奈、或宣稱看見幻影、或為做夢所迷惑。這些病徵所顯示的象徵意義就是:他們正承受到意圖的壓力。

有些病人從頭到尾說話語調咄咄逼人,有些話說一半,猶豫不定,有些說溜嘴,有些描述不清楚,有些遲到,故意缺席,有些厲罵責備,恐懼幻影,有些咆哮激怒,威嚇不已。這些都可看出,他們承受「意圖壓力」的程度。不過,通常病人肯來看醫生,願意在對談中接受治療,這種「意圖壓力」倒很少到達實際暴力的程度。

這些攻擊意圖非常明顯。我們觀察到:人對依靠他的人常會任意欺凌。這種刻意的攻擊常會咬囓、腐蝕、瓦解、使無能、甚至導致死亡。有一位兒子困難地對母親坦承,他有同性戀的傾向,母親激怒起來,咆踍說:「你這個不中用的性無能!」

這種傷害的攻擊正是一位強勢的母親所常表現的。我發現,精神分析過程要將這種傷害完全去除是不可能的。

這種攻擊在實際治療過程處處可見。有時不必表達都可以感受到攻擊的存在。有些父母僅僅站在一旁,就足以造成威脅的氣氛。處罰者不必大張旗鼓,小孩就能敏銳感覺到。他的影響可說比任何暴行都深遠。

這種精神現象傳統心理學無法解釋,因為它在語意上就已認同父母的形象權威。現在精神分析學有所進步,是因為它從主體的成長過程探討,發覺到:個人的攻擊傾向由瞬間影像所決定。這些影像也許變化萬端,根本上是我們人類「本能」所組成。

攻擊傾向就是這些影像中最明目張膽的。其面貌可以說匪夷所思:有去勢、切割、肢解、挖腸剖肚、脫臼、吞噬等等。這些影像我將他們收集,稱之為「瓦解身體的眾生相」。

社會習俗也有許多表現這種人與身體的特定關係。從原始社會的紋身、切陰唇、割包皮,到現代社會跟隨時髦,任意隆乳隆鼻,割雙眼皮等文明怪象,都表現出:人對身體的自然型態欠缺尊重。

看看兩歲到五歲的小孩,獨處或群戲時,將玩具拉扯頭顱,挖開內臟。各種古怪想法,真是無奇不有。再看看,洋娃娃被撕碎到面目全非,可證明我所言絕非誇張。

我們試翻閱希羅、波西的作品,在此百圖集裏,我們可找到凌虐人類的各種攻擊影像。其中有口腔、肛門器官的原始活體解剖,其殘酷可以說是惡魔的程度。宛如地獄圖,那些人在縱慾狂歡之餘,還對肛門,性器官等部位,塞入異物挖掘,變態的得到滿足。

這些殘酷影像不斷在夢中出現,使我們精神分析無法視而不見。我記得一位病人以反復出現的幻想來發洩他攻擊的欲念。在夢中,他看到自己駕駛汽車,由一位跟他有曖昧行為的女人陪伴。後面跟隨一條飛魚,皮膚透明,橫切面水流滴落。簡直就是一幅活生生的內藏解剖畫面。

  

論點三:激發精神分析技巧的原始動機本身亦是攻擊性。

表面看來,對話和談表示要放棄攻擊性。從蘇格拉底開始,哲學就一直希望「理性」會勝利。可是在共和國一章中,泰瑞斯氣沖沖的退出,就足以看出,文辭辯論其實無效用。

我曾強調,精神分析師曾透過對話溝通,治療好最嚴重的瘋狂。若是文詞辯論無效用,佛洛依德究竟是添加了什麼仙丹妙方?

分析時,病人被告知,只要能幫他解除疾病,及自己都不知是什麼的症狀,他儘可盎暢所欲言,無所顧忌。

首先在分析師謹慎的安排下,只有病人的聲音被聽見。很顯然的,這是分析師刻意節制不要提供任何勸告,或企圖影響病人。由於這種節制跟原先的治療目的背道而馳,所以當然是另有更深動機。

那麼分析師背後的態度是什麼?那就是以儘可能沒有個人因素的參與者提供對話。我們抹除自我,在我們臉上,不要有任何興趣、同情、和反應的表情出現。

我們避免任何個人好惡偏見。就是有我們也要隱藏起來。我們像是完全沒有個人立場。總之,我們要客觀超然。

也就是說,假如我們想要瞭解病人,我們不僅要超然客觀,而且還要準備言詞,在不動聲色之下,用來介入解釋。

在這樣的要求下潛藏著一陷阱,病人由於不斷地要求信任,會這樣說:「你相信吧?我已經被邪惡壓倒了。」病人一再說:「但是你卻仍然保持自滿自得,泰然自若,你算那一門子醫生?」

在此刻病人的猙獰真面目就出現了,有時會變成負面治療的反效果。佛洛依德曾在治療羅契佛口的個案時,遭遇到。病人如此表達:「我無法忍受,這世上除了我自己,還有人能解救我。」

當然,從更深感情需求來說,病人期望我們參與他的病情。但是我們要謹慎避免敵意的反應。佛洛依德也曾一再警告自己,不要企圖扮演預言家角色。只有聖徒,才有辦法完全超然冷漠,避免因為善心而侵犯對方,反而會引起反感。

至於拿自己的品德和優點來給對方做示範,我自己就曾遭遇到這樣的敵意反應。那是一位公家單位的官僚,腦袋充滿雖然荒謬可笑,卻一板正經的使命感。我還記得他當時的暴跳如雷。

無論如何,這種敵意反應,我們分析師早已經司空見慣。我們不是曾說過:所謂慈善家,背後隱藏的動機,其實也是一種攻擊侵犯。

可是我們卻讓病人對我們表現攻擊性,因為我們知道這些攻擊意圖,展現出來後,才能形成負面的移轉。這是我們精神分析的基本關鍵。

負面移轉的現象就是病人將他過去的可怕影象,透過言辭象徵的壓抑,轉形變化,不使再出現。憑藉壓抑,自我不再有肉體崩潰的顧慮。由於認同,產生了人格。

可以看出,攻擊的意圖只要稍有藉口,就會發揮出來。那盤踞在主體無意識底層的可怕影像,一受到意圖的慫恿,又會蠢蠢欲動。

這種現象在歇斯底里病人很明顯。一位女孩患肌肉無力症,好幾個月來各種治療方法都拒絕。然後突然愛戀上一位其貌不揚的對象。她的激情顯然帶有幻想的味道。她底層的可怕影像是父親。她一生都受到父親的支配,因此若要治療她的病症,得先治療她病態的激情。

偏執的神經質所產生的糾纏更不好打開,因為他的結構很明顯是要偽裝、替代、否認、分散和壓抑攻擊的意圖。他將攻擊化整為零,類似路易十四時期的戰術,先退兩步,再伺機轉進。我有很多病人,也都是使用軍事防衛的比喻,來說明他們心理的防衛機制。

至於恐懼症者,攻擊性的角色亦甚明顯。

因此,精神分析學若重新激起這種攻擊性,並不完全是壞事。

只是我們要技巧地避免讓病人的攻擊性意圖,把分析師在對話時的包容傾聽當著是認可支持,從而將自己的反對、否定、誇張和謊言等人格特質一一武裝起來。

我在此所謂人格特質,並不是指佛洛依德在形而上心理學理論所說的感情意識,而是他認為是自我屬性的常態,現象的本質,也就是他一再建議我們,人儘管反復無常,還是有些特質值得欣賞。

總之,我們稱意識的核心為自我,但思索起來又晦暗不明,充滿曖昧。有時自得意滿,有時自以為是,就這樣架構起人類主體的激情。這個「自我」為了捍衛存在的特權,不惜偽裝得牢不可破,結果造成自己都不認得「自我」是誰。

所以精神分析師不正面強攻,而採用蘇格拉底問題誘導法,迂迴轉進,等於是逐步將偏執病人控制繳械。偏執病人的機制,克美蘭稱之為「惡魔堡」,裏面組織嚴密,宛如銅牆鐵壁,分析師要滲透瓦解它還真不容易。

另一個因素是,時間會將焦慮和其感覺匯集在一起,在逃避或壓抑時就顯露在外。當可怕影像激動起來時,就隱而不現在。

我再說一遍,假如分析師的態度擺出一付高高在上,像個照妖鏡般,病人的可怕影像最容易激動起來。

想想看,假如病人在分析師身上看到的正是自己的模樣,會有怎樣的激烈反應。

大家都認為,攻擊性若過度緊張,會阻礙轉化移情,所以只能慢慢誘導,這正是未來分析師大致採用的。舉個極端的例子,假如病人看到面前的分析師似曾相識,好像自己化身,卻又宛如陌生人,他內心的焦慮將無法控制。

  

論點四:攻擊性是我們所謂「自戀」的認同,自我的正式結構,與自我表現三者互動的傾向。

精神分析將其主觀經驗記錄在心理學上。它對情感心理學的貢獻是:它發現人的共同心理狀態是多樣性的,包含幻影的恐懼、憤怒、憂愁、以及心態疲倦。

從意圖的主觀性到攻擊的傾向, 等於是從經驗現象學, 向形上心理學, 躍進了一大步。

但是這種躍進充其量只證明 :為了將攻擊性的反應客觀化, 以及無法大量連續維持這種躍進, 思想必須找到一種平衡的公式。 這就是我們所謂的「力比多」。

在許多重要的人格特質上, 例如, 偏執狂和偏執精神病患身上, 攻擊性傾向證明是其基本狀態。

我曾強調, 根據病患連續的慣性, 以及因幻覺所產生的精神起源 ,我們可以調和某種偏執的形式所產生的攻擊反應。 我曾治療一位自虐狂病人, 發覺他的攻擊行為解決了他對幻覺的建造, 這一點很耐人尋味。

因此, 攻擊性反應會連續出現, 從沒來由的突然發作, 挑釁的姿態, 到振振有詞的冷戰 ,遷怒責怪。 其間,偏執狂病人將自己跟社會疏離的原因,歸咎於非常原始的有機物(毒藥), 或魔法(被下符咒), 或心電感應(被催眠), 或病變(身體的受侵), 或欺侮( 扭曲對方意圖), 或侵占(秘密被竊), 或褻瀆 (身體被辱), 或司法不公( 法官有偏見), 或迫害(被偵查竊聽), 或威望受損(被污衊醜詆), 或報復( 被傷害利用)。

我曾證明, 在這些連續性當中, 我們發現病人的整個生理和社會狀態, 雖然受到影響, 甚至自我所組成的時間跟空間的概念,儘管感覺像是海市蜃樓, 儘管某些固執的感情阻礙了合理的思維, 卻仍然保留原有的自我結構

精神分析師杰尼曾證明受迫害的感覺是社會行為的現象, 但卻沒有探究他們的共同屬性。 那就是在人在受迫害的時刻, 精神會停滯不動, 類似影片放映中途突然斷片, 演員的臉孔固定停止的那種陌生感。

這種正式的停滯, 類似人類知識的一般結構, 組成自我及其客體的屬性是 :永恆、 身分、 實質。 總之, 其內涵絕不同於形態學派所謂的經驗, 可以孤立來轉換,或依照動物慾望來延伸。

事實上, 這種正式的停滯, 表示人的組織結構的某種斷裂, 某種不協調。人的內在組織是一種潛力 ,需要擴大領域, 發展力量, 要讓其客體具有多樣抗拒工具, 多樣表達管道, 以及防衛的盔甲。

我所謂的偏執知識 ,在人精神成長過程的重要時刻, 都可以找到蛛絲馬跡。 每一個都代表主體自我認同客觀化的階段。

稍加觀察, 我們就能窺見小孩發展的不同階段 。蔡洛特, 芝加哥學派的心理學家, 曾發現有不同層次的重要表徵。 這些主觀的表徵 ,經過精神分析的整合後 才顯出其真正價值。

第一層次指出 ,人在孩童時的早期階段, 會經驗到跟自己相同的雙重人存在。我們看到, 嬰兒大約八個月大時 (中間相差不要超過兩個半月), 就顯現這種雙重人幻想的動作手勢, 像是再重新建造另一個人不完善的努力, 把現實清楚的事物混淆一起, 像是電影中同時出現的旁白字幕。 更值得注意的是 ,嬰兒在這段期間, 其他的智能尚未完全發展。

因此, 嬰兒在受到敲打時會有報復的攻擊性。 不能只看成是力量的運用, 或是身體的自然反應。 我們必須了解, 此時嬰兒是在做人際之間的調適 ,他必須調適身體的姿勢, 或躺或動, 來適應社會的功能。 精神分析師華隆的研究, 就曾提醒我們注意, 嬰兒身體的各種表情動作, 處處都是社會化行為表徵。

而且 ,我自己相信, 在此時 嬰兒在精神層面 ,會期望能成功地整合身體的各種功能, 因為在那個階段 嬰兒尚發育不全,動作尚不能運用自如。

                                                

Why Am I Destiny?

November 19, 2007

I know my fate. One day there will be associated with my name the recollection of something frightful—of a crisis like no other before on earth, of the profoundest collision of conscience, of a decision evoked against everything that until then had been believed in, demanded, sanctified. I am not a man I am dynamite. And with all there is nothing in me of a founder of a religion—religions are affairs of the rabble, I have need of washing my hands after contact with religious people…I do not want believers’ I think I am too malicious to be believe in myself, I never speak to masses…I have a terrible fear I shall one day be pronounced holy: one will guess why I bring out this book before beforehand; it is intended to prevent people from making mischief with me…I do not want to be a saint, rather even a buffoon…Perhaps I am a buffoon.

我知到道自己的命運。有一天,跟我的名字聯想在一起的是可怕的回憶:史無前例的危機、良心的內在衝突、以及顛覆傳統信仰的另類思想。我不是凡人,我是炸藥。儘管如此,我絕非是宗教的一代教主。宗教是愚夫愚婦的事,跟這些教民接觸過幾次後,我就不敢再領教了。我不需要信徒。我自己也是因緣說法,了無定性。很多境界實在也不足為俗眾言明。我很擔心,有朝一日,我竟被供奉為聖主。所以我提前出版這本書,以防備日後人們把我妝扮戲弄。我不想要當聖徒,請別把我當小丑般妝扮,弄得好似我就是小丑。

And nonetheless, or rather not nonetheless—for there has hitherto been nothing more mendacious than saints—the truth speaks out of me.—But my truth is dreadful: for hitherto the lie has been called truth.—Revaluation of all values: this is my formula for an act of supreme coming-to-oneself on the part of mankind which in me has become fles and genius. It is my fate to have to be the first decent human being, to know myself in opposition to the mendaciousness of millennia… I am the first to discover the truth, in that I was the first to sense—smell—the lie as lie. My genius is in my nostrils…I contradict as has never been contradicted and am nonetheless the opposite of a negative spirit.

    這是因為聖徒是有史以來天大的謊言家。而我所說的卻是句句真理。但是我的真理像是危言聳聽,因為大家已經錯將謊言當真理。重新評估一切價值吧!人類若要返回本我真如,這是我身體力行所領悟的不二法門。在數千年基督教謊言的籠罩之下,我是第一位堂堂正正的人,知道人是什麼,所以我有使命感。我是第一位發現真理,因為我是第一位能感覺,能嗅出謊言的腐臭。我的特長在鼻子的嗅覺。我反駁重重謊言謬說,積極奮發,不落入悲觀孤憤。

I am a bringer of good tidings such as there has never been, I know tasks from such a height that any conception of them has hitherto been lacking; only after me is it possible to hope again. With all that I am necessarily a man of fatality. For when truth steps into battle with the lie of millennia we shall have convulsions, an earthquake spasm, a transposition of valley and mountain such as never been dreamed of. The concept politics, has then become completely absorbed into a war of spirits, all the ower-structures of the old society have been blown into the air—they one and all reposed on the lie: Only after me will there be grand politics on earth.

我帶來的福音是前所未有的。我在高山上沉思時就知道,直到目前,我們缺乏真正的福音。只有等我宣揚後,大家才可能重新懷著希望。這樣,我注定是悲劇性的人物,因為真理要跟數千年的謊言相搏鬥,必然像地震暴發,天崩地裂,山谷移位。本來是理念不同,就變成主權信仰之爭,因為舊社會的權力結構,完全依附謊言,會被炸得粉身碎骨。這場搏鬥將是前所未有的慘烈,只有在我之後,思想的戰役才會如此大規模出現。

              2

Does one want a formula for a destiny that has become man? It stands in my Zarathustra.

  –and he who wants to be a creator in good and evil has first to be a destroyer and break values. Thus the greatest evil belongs with the greatest good: this, however, is the creative good. I am by far the most terrible human being there has ever been; this does not mean I shall not be the most beneficent. I know joy in destruction to a degree corresponding to my strength for destruction—in both I obey my Dionysian nature, which does not know how to separate No-doing from Yes-saying. I am the first immoralist: I am therewith the destroyer par excellence.

 我們既然生而為人,就要真正當個人,這個不二法門是什麼呢?且聽蘇魯支法師言:   想要創造善惡價值觀,必先破除舊價值觀。   惡跟善環環相扣,欲創造善者不可無氣魄。   我是古今第一可怕的人物,反之,我也可能是最具悲憫的人物。摧枯拉朽,其樂無窮。猶如英雄豪傑,力足以撼動山河,既然知道真理正義在於我身,就毫不怯懦猶豫。我猶如一代「背德」思想家,將舊觀念摧毀破除無餘。                   

 3  I have not been asked, as I should have been asked, what the name Zarathustra means in precisely my mouth, in the mouth of the first immoralist: for what constitutes the tremendous uniqueness of that Persian in history is the precisely the opposite of this. Zarathustra was the first to see in the struggle between good and evil the actual wheel in the working of things: the translation of morality into the realm of metaphysics, as force, cause, end-in-itself, is his work.  

 身為一代「背德」思想家,本來應該有人問起:我口口聲聲,蘇魯支法師是何許人也。可是在波斯歷史上,蘇魯支法師教義的精深博大卻是時常為人提起。蘇魯支法師首先從人性善惡交戰過程中,領悟出人生輪轉的運行之道,於是他致力於將道德詮釋、提昇到形而上領域,做為生命的動力、目標,及嚮往。

 But this question is itself at bottom its own answer. Zarathustra created this most fateful of errors, morality: consequently he must also be the first recognize it. Not only has he had longer and greater experience here than any other thinker—is the whole of history is indeed the experimental refutation of the proposition of so-called “moral world-order’

   但是以道德做為人生的解答,問題也出在本身。道德是蘇魯支法師所創造,錯誤也鑄在此;結果他自己必須先認同。對於「秩序井然的道德世界」的構想,他比任何思想家體會更深,因為整個人類歷史就是一部道德的興衰史。 

What is more important is that Zarathustra is more truthful than any other thinker. His teaching, and his alone, upholds truthfulness as the supreme virtue—that is to say, the opposite of the cowardice of ‘idealist’, who take flight in face of reality; Zarathustra has more courage in him than all other thinkers put together. To tell the truth and to shoot well with arrows : that is Persian virtue. –Have I been understood? The self-overcoming of morality through truthfulness, the self-overing of the moralist into his opposite—into me—that is what the name Zarathustra means in mouth.

 但是重要的是,蘇魯支比其他思想家更愛真理。只有他的教義揭櫫真理為最高的善。比起「理學家」一遇到現實就逃避的怯懦,他可說是勇敢。其他思想家總加起來的勇氣都比不上他。義無反顧的說出真理就是蘇魯支的優點。我的意思,大家明白吧?道德需要透過真理來反躬自省;道德的反躬自省可能發現對方才是對的,也就是,我「背德」思想家,被詆為「不道德」,其實我才是真正的「道德」。我出口必提蘇魯支就是這個意思。                

     4At bottom my expression immoralist involves two denials. I deny first a type of man who has hitherto counted as the highest, the good, the benevolent, beneficient; I deny secondly a kind of morality which has come to accepted and to dominate as morality in itself—decadence morality, in more palpable terms Christian morality. The second contradiction might be seen as the decisive one, since the over-valuation of goodness and benevolence by and large already counts with me as a consequence of decadence, as a symptom of weakness, as incompatible with ascending and affirmative: denial and destruction is a condition of affirmation. 

基本上,我用「背德思想家」這字眼,表示雙重否定。第一、我否定直到目前被視為最崇高、最善良、最悲憫、最仁慈的耶穌。第二,我否定現在已被接受是主流的道德,頹廢道德;說得更明白些、就是基督教道德。第二項否定最具關鍵,因為我認為善行跟悲憫造成頹廢的結果,羸弱的病徵,跟生命的提升和肯定格格不入,所以我要予以重新評價。 

I deal first of all with the psychology of the good man. In order to assess what a type of man is worth one has to compute how much his preservation costs—one has to know the conditions of his existence. The condition for the existence of the good is the lie–:expressed differently, the desire not to see at any price what is the fundamental constitution of reality, that is to say not such as to call forth benevolent instincts at all times, even less such as to permit at all times an interference by short-sighted good-natured hands. To regret states of distress in general as an objection, as something that must be abolished, is the niaiseri par excellence, in a general sense a real disaster in its consequences, a fatality of stupidity—almost as stupid as would be the will to abolish bad weather—perhaps from pity to the poor. 

首先我們來分析一下善人耶穌的心理學。為了評估信仰善人耶穌是否值得,我們必須先算一算信仰他要花多少代價,以及他是在什麼狀況下存在。人需要善人耶穌存在,原因就是人需要謊言。換言之,人自己不敢去面對生命赤裸裸的現實狀況。只好不惜代價,請善人耶穌召喚悲憫情懷來承擔,甚至還希望他大仁大德伸手幫助到底。依我觀點,痛苦是生命流轉的常態。將痛苦視為不祥之物,欲去之而後快,其實是幼稚之極,結果反而都帶來災難。這種不智之舉,就像我們要日日陽光普照,永遠沒有壞天氣一樣。   

 In the general economy of the whole the fearfulnesses of reality( in the affects, in the desires, in the will to power) are to an incalculable degree more necessary than any form of petty happiness, so called’ goodness’; since the latter is conditioned by falsity of instinct one must even be cautious about granting it a place at all.   

就生命的整體活力而言,人的生命本質包含了各種感覺、慾望、以及生命意志力。這些本質的發揮展現,比起那小小的善行之樂,迫切性高出不知多少倍。而善行說穿了只是在掩飾生命的本質,實在不必太過度重視。    

 I shall have a grand occasion of demonstrating the measurelessly uncanny consequences for the whole of history of optimism, that offspring of the hominess optimi.  Zarathustra, the first to grasp that optimism is just as decadent as pessimism  and perhaps more harmful, says: good men never tell the truth. The good taught you false shores and false securities; you were born and kept in the lies of the good. Everything has been distorted and twisted down to its very bottom through the good.  

且讓我舉個明顯例子,樂觀主義要鼓舞大家積極奮鬥,結果卻反而招致極端不幸。蘇魯支首先注意到,樂觀主義跟悲觀主義一樣頹廢,甚至更加有害。他說:「善人從不說實話!善人告訴你的海岸是不真實的,安全措施也是假的。你生活在善人的謊言之中。由於善人每件事物都被扭曲得面目全非。」  

  Fortunately the world has not been constructed for the satisfaction of instincts such as would permit merely good-natured herd animals to find their narrow happiness in it; to demand that everything should become ‘ beautiful soul’—or , as Mr. Herbert Spencer wants, altruistic, would mean to deprive existence of its great character, would mean to castrate mankind and to reduce it to a paltry Chinadom—And this has been attempted! …Precisely this has been called morality..  

所幸,這世界被創造,並非只是滿足那些天性善良的綿羊族群得到庸俗之樂。若如史賓塞所言:「人要利他,要溫馴和睦,要慈悲善良,要靈魂崇高」,那簡直是剝奪了人的本性,閹割人的氣概,使人變得畏瑣萎縮。可是,竟然大家就是這樣在搞,還美其名謂「道德」! 

In this sense Zarathustra calls the good now ‘ the ultimate men’, now the ‘beginning of the end’; above all he feels them to be most harmful species of man, because they preserve their existence as much at the expense of truth as at the expense of the future. 

因此,蘇魯支有時稱這些善人為「人的終結者」,有時稱「末代族群」。尤其是,他認為這些善人真是傷天害理,表面上是拯救人類,事實上,犧牲了人生真相,也剝奪了人的未來。 善人無法創造,他們只是人的終結者。誰創造新天地、新價值,誰就受其迫害。善人犧牲未來,整個人類的未來!善人總是人終結者。世界曾受到許多傷害,其中善人為害最大!     

   5Zarathustra, the first psychologist of the good, is—consequently—a friend of the wicked. When a decadence-species of man has risen to the rank of the highest species of man, this can happen only at the expense of its antithetical species, the species of man strong and certain of life. When the herd-animal is resplendent in the glow of the highest virtue, the exceptional man must be devalued to the wicked. When mendaciousness at any price appropriates the word ‘truth’ for its perspective, what is actually veracious must be discovered bearing the worst names.      蘇魯支這位善人的首位心理分析師,隨後也同流合污。當頹廢的族群盤踞高位,積極向上的人,雖然堅強自信,也難於施展抱負。當綿羊族群沐浴在善行的榮光照耀中,鶴立雞群的人必然被貶抑為邪惡。當謊言強行篡奪「真理」的寶座,真正的「真話」只有在假語村言中尋覓。   Zarathurstra here leaves no doubt: he says that it was knowledge of precisely the good, the ‘best’ , which made him feel horror at man in general; it was out of this repugnance that the wings grew which ‘ carried him to distant futures’ –he does not dissemble that it is precisely in relation to the good that his type of man, a relatively superhuman type, is superhuman, that the good and just would call hims superman a devil…   對此,蘇魯支瞭然於胸。他說,正因為他太瞭解這些善人的顛倒是非,他對俗眾感到不寒而慄。積鬱莫伸,他只好響往振翅高飛,遙遠未來的超人。他也不諱言,他的超人,儘管高瞻遠矚,將會被這些所謂善人、正義之士,醜詆為「惡魔」。    目睹你們這些位居高堂之士,竟然醜詆我的超人為惡魔,不禁令我鄙夷之餘,心中暗笑。   超人的鴻圖大志,磊落情懷,你們萎瑣的心思何能識得?    It is at this point and nowhere else that one must make a start if one is to understand what Zarathustra’s intentions are: the species of man he delineates delineates  reality as it is: he is strong enough for it—he is not estranged from or entranced by it, he is reality itself, he still has all that is fearful and questionable in reality in him, only thus can man possess greatness…    就在此刻此地,蘇魯支的意圖展露無餘:他所創造的超人才是宏觀真正宇宙。他足夠堅強自創新世界。他並沒有疏離世界,也不是沾沾自喜,因為他已自成一世界。他的世界恢宏廣闊,令人肅然起敬。憑此胸襟人才夠得上「偉大」!           6  But there is also another sense in which I have chosen for myself the word immoralist as a mark of distinct and badge of honor; I am proud to possess this word which sets me off against the whole of humanity. No one has yet felt Christian morality as beneath him: that requires a height, a farsightedness, a hitherto altogether unheard-of psychological profundity and abysmalness.   但是我選用「背德思想家」這字眼尚有另一意義,就是表示尊崇。我很自負此字眼落在我身上,因為我有「自反而縮雖千萬人吾往矣」的氣概。直至目前都還沒有人發現,基督教道德觀配不上我們。我們人類需要更高瞻遠矚,博大精深的人生觀。直至現在,所有思想家都繞著基督教道德觀頂禮膜拜。在我之前,有誰膽敢闖入基督教聖堂,將污染世間的惡臭謊言找出來源?誰膽敢懷疑聖堂是真是假?在我之前,有那位哲學家是心理學家,而不是賣弄「理想」的高級騙子?從我開始,才真正有心理學。打前鋒的難免頭破血流,這畢竟是我的命運。我自知危險所在,因為我也是第一位嚮往超人,藐視俗眾,睥睨一切。            

Why Am I So Clever?

November 19, 2007

 

Why I Am So Clever

By Nietzsche

Ecce Home

   Why do I know a few more things? Why am I so clever altogether? I have never reflected on questions that are none—I have not squandered myself.—I have ,for example, no experience of actual religious difficulties. I am entirely at a loss to know to what extent I ought to have felt ‘sinful’. I likewise lack a reliable criterion of a pang of conscience: from what one hears of it, a pang of conscience does not seem to me anything respectable…

為什麼我懂得比別人多?為什麼我如此聰明?因為有些瑣碎無聊的問題,我根本不屑一顧,我才不浪費我的寶貴時間。例如,我從未為實際的宗教問題所困擾。

所謂「原罪」我完全不予理會。「良心不安」對我而言也是缺乏可靠的準則。據我所知,人為「良心不安」所困擾,實在不是什麼光彩的事。

  I should not like to leave an act in the lurch afterwards, I would as a matter of principle prefer to leave the evil outcome, the consequences, out of the question of values. When the outcome is evil one can easily lose the true eye for one has done: a pang of conscience seems to me a kind of ‘evil eye’. To honor to oneself something that went wrong all the more because it went wrong—that rather would accord with my morality.—‘God’, ‘immortality of the soul’ ‘redemption’, ‘the Beyond’, all of them concepts to which I have given no attention and no time, not even as a child—perhaps I was never childish enough for it?

 我不想要把事情弄得曖昧不明。原則上,我寧可認為:「惡有惡報」的觀念,不涉及價值問題。因為它使我們無法正確地看待自己的所做所為。「良心不安」對我而言就是一種「惡報觀」。它本身就有問題,以問題來處理問題,還隆重得煞有其事,這是我的道德觀所無法接受的。「上帝」、「靈魂不朽」、「救贖」、「天堂」等等觀念,我即使在小時候,都不予理會,也沒有時間理會。可能我還不至於幼稚到相信這些。

   I have absolutely no knowledge of atheism as an outcome of reasoning, still less as an event: with me it is obviously by instinct. I am too inquisitive, too questionable, too high spirited to rest content with a crude answer. God is a crude answer, a piece of indelicacy against us thinkers—fundamentally even a crude prohibition to us: you shall not think! …I am interested in quite a different way in a question upon which the ‘salvation of mankind’ depends far more than it does upon any kind of quaint curiosity of the theologians; the question nutriment.

   我絕非有什麼無神論的知識來做推論或受到什麼影響。我純粹是靠著本能。我凡事喜歡追根究底、心靈崇高,簡陋的答案滿足不了我。「上帝」之說過於簡陋,對於我們思想家簡直是冒犯,本質上甚至還是禁令:你不可思想!「人類的救贖」這個問題,神學家費心思量,我卻寧可從「營養學」的觀點來探討。

  One can for convenience’ sake formulate it thus: ‘ how to nourish yourself so as to attain your maximum of strength, of virtue in the Renaissance style, of moraline-free virtue?’—My experiences here are as bad as they possibly could be; I am astonished that I heard this question so late, that I learned ‘reason’ from these experiences so late.

Only the perfect worthlessness of our German education—‘idealism’—can to some extent explain to me why on precisely this point I was backward to the point of holiness.

  為方便故,我這樣說明:吾人該如何滋養自己,以獲得最大力量,發展文藝復興的昂揚精神,及免於教條化的品德?我在這方面的心路歷程其實甚為坎坷,因為我聞道太遲,恨不得早得知此「窮理辯義」方式。原因是:我所受的德國教育,是「理想主義」,其實百無一用,以至於我對「營養學」之說,認識甚晚。

  The ‘education’ which from the first teaches one to lose sight of realities so as to hunt after altogether problematic, so-called ‘ideal’ objectives, ‘classical education’ for example—as if it were not from the first an utterly fruitless undertaking to try to unite ‘classical’ and German’ in one concept! It is, moreover, mirth-provoking—just think of a ‘classically education’ Leipziger!

   德國古典教育從一開頭,就教導我們忽視現實,以追尋大而無當的所謂「理想」,好像將「古典」與「德國」融合成為一體,到頭來就能有所成就一般。瞧瞧!這種「古典教育」所培養出來的德國公民,那副德性不禁令人發噱。

  Until my very maturest years I did in fact eat badly—in the language of morals ‘ impersonally’, ‘selflessly’, ‘altruistically’, for the salvation of cooks and other fellow Christians. With the aid of Leipzig cookery, for example, which accomplished my earliest study of Schopenhauer, I very earnestly denied my ‘will to live’. To ruin one’s stomach so as to receive inadequate nutriment—the aforesaid cookery seems to me to solve the problem wonderfully well.

   從小到大,我的精神食糧確實營養太差。那些道德字眼:「客觀」、「無私」、「利他」,都是當時烹調給基督徒享用的。在這些精神廚師的調養之下,再加上我早年閱讀叔本華的悲觀哲學,我幾乎要拒絕我的「生命意志」了!營養不良,終於弄壞我的胃腸。正本清原,我還是要回到以上所說的「營養學」才能解決。

   

Why Am I So Wise?

November 19, 2007


@font-face { font-family: 新細明體; } @font-face { font-family: @新細明體; } @page {mso-page-border-surround-header: no; mso-page-border-surround-footer: no; } @page Section1 {size: 595.3pt 841.9pt; margin: 72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin: 42.55pt; mso-footer-margin: 49.6pt; mso-paper-source: 0; layout-grid: 18.0pt; } P.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: “Times New Roman”; mso-style-parent: “”; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt } LI.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: “Times New Roman”; mso-style-parent: “”; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt } DIV.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: “Times New Roman”; mso-style-parent: “”; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt } P.MsoDocumentMap { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; BACKGROUND: navy; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: “Times New Roman” } LI.MsoDocumentMap { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; BACKGROUND: navy; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: “Times New Roman” } DIV.MsoDocumentMap { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; BACKGROUND: navy; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: “Times New Roman” } DIV.Section1 { page: Section1 }

Why I Am So Wise

                  1

The fortunateness of my existence, its uniqueness perhaps, lies in its fatality: to express it in the form of a riddle, as my father I have already died, as my mother I still live and grow old. This twofold origin, as it were from the highest and the lowest rung of the ladder of life, at once decadent and beginning—this if anything explains that neutrality, that freedom from party in relation to the total problem of life which perhaps distinguishes me.

 

為何我如此智慧

我何幸生而為人,獨立特行,注定踽踽獨行,宛如難解之謎。我猶如自己生父,前世已不可考。我又如自己生母,現在仍生存,而且已漸老邁。生命的階梯需有雙重起源,最高為父,最低為母。既是沒落,又是開始。兩者兼俱使我能離群索居,截然不同於云云眾生。

 

I have a subtler sense for signs of ascent and decline than any man has ever had, I am the teacher par excellence in this matter—I know both, I am both.—My father died at the age of thirty-six; he was delicate, lovable and morbid, like a being destined to pay this world only a passing—a gracious reminder of life rather than life itself. In the same year in which his life declined mine too declined: in the thirty-sixth year of my life I arrived at the lowest point of my vitality—I still lived, but without being able to see three places in front of me.

 

對於上昇和沒落的種種跡象我比認何人都敏感。對此我不用他人指點,因為我瞭解這兩者,我自己就是兼有上昇和沒落。我父親三十六歲過世,他身體羸弱,文質彬彬。對於如此弱不禁風的人,人生只是浮光掠影,而非真槍實彈。跟父親一樣,我的生命也在同一年沒落。在三十六歲時,我的生命陷入精力的最低潮。我雖然活著,但已前途渺茫。

 

At that time—it was 1879—I relinquished my Basel professorship, lived through the summer like a shadow in St.Moritze and the following winter, the most sunless of my life, as a shadow in Naumburg. This was my minimum: “ The Wanderer and his Shadow” came to existence during the course of it. I undoubtedly knew all about shadows in those days….

 

1879年,我我放棄在貝斯爾的教授職位,整個夏天,像個影子般索居聖摩力斯,隨後冬天,移居南柏閣,同樣像影子般黯淡無光。這是我作品最少的一年。這段期間,我只寫了「流浪者及其影子」。不可諱言,當時我對影子感觸頗深。

 

In the following winter, the first winter I spent in Genoa, that sweetening and spiritualization which is virtually inseparable from an extreme poverty of blood and muscle produced ‘ Daybreak’ . The perfect brightness and cheerfulness, even exuberance of spirit reflected in the said work is in my case compatible not only with the profoundest physiological weakness, but even with an extremity of pain.

 

翌年冬天,我首次在皆偌亞過冬,由於身體貧血嚴重,肌肉軟弱,自然傾向於喜好甜美和靈性上的事物,就這樣我寫了「黎明」。這篇作品喜氣洋洋,靈思煥發,

正是身體上的委靡不振,痛苦萬分所激發的渴望。

 

(譯者言:國家亦是如此,越是國勢武力積弱的國家,越是強調其精神文明,自卑補償心理也。)

 

In the midst of the torments which attended an uninterrupted three-day headache accompanied by the laborious vomiting of phlegm—I possessed a dialectical clarity par excellence and thought my way very cold-bloodedly through things for which when I am in better health I am not enough of a climber, not refined, not cold enough.

 

我連續頭痛三日,費力嘔吐痰血。就在受盡折騰之際,我的頭腦思辯卻特別清晰。於是心平氣和地將此作品一氣呵成。假如我身體健康,我反而無法足夠精湛、足夠冷靜完成此艱辛鉅作。

 

My readers perhaps know the extent to which I regard dialectics as a symptom of decadence, for example in the most famous case of all: in the case of Socrates.—All morbid disturbances of the intellect, even that semi-stupefaction consequent on fever, have remained to this day totally unfamiliar things to me, on their nature and frequency I had first to instruct myself by scholarly methods. My blood flows slowly. No one has ever been able to diagnose fever in me. A doctor who treated me for some time as a nervous case said at last: “ No! there is nothing wrong with your nerves, it is only I who am nervous.”

 

讀者可能知道,為什麼我視思維為頹廢的病徵。最明顯的例子是蘇格拉底。隨著發高燒之後,陷入半昏迷狀態,思潮反而澎湃翻騰,此時所激發的東西直至今日我尚不甚瞭然。更不用說要如何以學者的研究方法分析發作性質及頻率了。有位醫生有段時間曾診斷我是神經質,最後說:「不!你的神經沒毛病,我自己的神經才有問題。」

 

Any kind of local degeneration absolutely undemonstrable; or organically originating stomach ailment, though there does exist, as a consequence of general exhaustion, a profound weakness of the gastric system. Conditions of the eyes, sometimes approaching dangerously close to blindness, also only consequence, not causal; so that with every increase in vitality eyesight has also again improved.  Convalescence means with me a long, all too long succession of years—it also unfortunately means relapse, deterioration, periods of a kind of decadence. I spelled it out forwards and backwards.

 

思維的澎湃絕對無法從局部病狀來說明。也無法歸因於引起胃痛的器官,雖然精疲力盡之後,胃腸系統會非常虛弱。眼睛的情況有時危險到將近盲目,不過,那是結果,而不是原因。因為隨著精力的逐漸增加,眼力也隨之好轉。我花了很長久的時間才康復,中間還不幸地時常復發、惡化和頹廢。經歷這些後,我還需要說:我瞭解什麼叫頹廢嗎?頹廢對我而言已是如數家珍了。

 

Even that filigree art of grasping and comprehending in general, that finger for nuances, that psychology of ‘ looking around the corner’ and whatever else characterizes me was learned only then, is the actual gift of that time in which everything in me became more subtle, observation itself together with all the organs of observation.

 

領悟力和理解力的細膩功夫,分析力的明察秋毫,旁敲側擊的心理手法,任何我的特長都是當時得來。我身上的每一樣,觀察力以及觀察的器官都變得微妙敏銳,

都是當時實際上的所獲得的。

 

To look from a morbid perspective towards healthier concepts and values, and again conversely to look down from the abundance and certainty of rich life into the secret labor of the instinct of decadence—that is what I have practiced most, it has been my own particular field of experience, in this if in anything I am a master. I now have the skill and knowledge to invert perspectives: first reason why a ‘ revaluation of values’ is perhaps possible at all to me alone.

 

從病態的觀點展望更健康的觀念和價值,然後再倒過來,從充實生活的意氣昂揚俯視頹廢本能的萎靡不振,這是我曾反復演練過的。可說是我的特別專長,我是個中高手。現在我擁有把不同觀點顛倒觀察的能耐跟知識。這就是為什麼若要重新評估生命的價值,我是最佳人選了。

               2

 

   Setting aside the fact that I am a decadent, I also its antithesis. My proof of this is, among other things, that in combating my sick conditions I always instinctively chose the right means: while the decadent as such always chooses the means harmful to him. As summa summarum I was healthy, as corner, as speciality I was decadent. That energy for absolute isolation and detachment from my accustomed circumstances, the way I compelled myself no longer to let myself be cared for, served, doctored—this betrayed an unconditional certainty of instinct as to what at that time was needful above all else.

 

   姑且不論我是頹廢者,我也是積極向上者。在跟病魔搏鬥時,頹廢者總是處於不利的挨打立場,我總卻總是本能地選擇有利的角度反撲,就足以證明。大體而言,我是健康的,只偶爾局部角落我才顯得頹廢。我有精力完全擺脫捨棄我已習慣的環境,從零開始;我強迫自己不再接受照顧、服侍、或醫生治療;這些都顯露出,在當下最迫切的時刻,我當機立斷的豪氣。

 

   I took myself in hand, I myself made myself healthy again: the precondition for this—every physiologist will admit it—is that one is fundamentally healthy. A being who is typically morbid cannot become healthy, still less can he make himself healthy; conversely, for one who is typically healthy being sick can even be an energetic stimulant to life, to more life.

 

   我採取自救措施;使自己重新獲得健康。先決條件是:我體質上就是健康的。

這一點醫生都認同。若天生就是弱不禁風,怎樣也健康不了。相反的,天生健康的人,病魔來襲更能激發生命潛力,更意氣風發。

 

   Thus in fact does that long period of sickness seem to me now; I discovered life as it were anew, myself included, I tasted all good and even petty things in a way that others could not easily taste them—I made out of my will to health, to life, my philosophy….For pay heed to this: it was in the years of my lowest vitality that I ceased to be a pessimist: the instinct for self-vitality that I ceased to be a pessimist: the instinct for self-recovery forbade to me a philosophy of indigence and discouragement…

  因此,對那段生病的漫長時期,我的心得是:我重新恢復生命的原來面貌; 我品嚐到生命的崇高及卑微,這是別人無法輕易做到的。  我靠自己意志力得到健康,生命和自己的哲學。請注意:就在我精力最低潮的時候,我不再是悲觀主義者。我自我復健的本能使我無法接受貧瘠洩氣的悲觀哲學。

 

     And in what does one really recognize that someone has turned out well! In that a human being who has turned out well does our senses good: that he is carved out of wood at once hard, delicate and sweet-smelling. He has a taste only for what is beneficial to him; his pleasure, his joy ceases where the measure of what is beneficial is overstepped. He divines cures for injuries, he employs ill chances to his own advantage; what does not kill him makes him stronger. Out of everything he sees, hears, experiences he instinctively collects together his sum: he is a principle of selection, he rejects much.

 

   那麼要怎樣我們才真正體認到結果是最好呢?那就是:懂得尊重自己感官的人結果最好。人的雕琢木料是既堅硬、又脆弱、卻芬芳。人喜愛對自己有利益的東西。若自己的利益的衡量受到違背,人怎樣也快樂高興不起來。人受傷時會自覓治療的方法。遇霉運當頭,也會設法轉危為安。死亡的威脅只是使人更堅強。人會從所看、所聽、所經驗當中,累積自己的一套本領:人懂得選擇;人也知道要不斷捨棄。

 

  He is always in his company, whether he traffics with books, people or landscapes: he does honor when he chooses, when he admits, when he trusts. He reacts slowly to every kind of stimulus, with that slowness which a protracted caution and a willed pride have bred in him—he tests an approaching stimulus, he is far from going out to meet it. He believes in neither ‘ misfortune’ nor in ‘guilt’ “ he knows how to forget—he is strong enough for everything to have to turn out for the best for him. Very well, I am the opposite of a decadent: for I have just described myself.

 

  人總是在群體當中,不論跟他所交往的是書、是人們、或是風景。人在選擇時、認同時、信任時,表現最為崇高。遇到外來刺激時,人會從容反應。然後在從容中謹慎衡量,維護自我的意志尊嚴。刺激逼近時,人會先行測試,不會冒然投入。人決不信「噩運」或「原罪」之說。該遺忘時,人會懂得遺忘。為了結果對人有利益,人要足夠堅強。好了,這就是跟頹廢者表現大大不同的地方。我剛才所描述的就是我自己。

                  3

 The twofold succession of experiences, this accessibility to me of apparently separate worlds, is repeated in my nature in every respect—I am a Doppelganger, I have a ‘second’ face in addition to the first one. And perhaps also a third…Even by virtue of my descent I am permitted to look beyond all merely locally, merely nationally conditioned perspectives, it costs me no effort to be a ‘good European’.

     既是頹廢者,又是積極向上者。這雙重經驗的迭替,顯示我能進入兩種截然不同的世界。這在我天性中處處表露無餘。我像是幽靈化身,不僅擁有第二臉孔,可能還有第三臉孔。由於我祖先自外地遷來,我思想宏觀,超越狹隘的國家局限,放眼歐洲,對我並非難事。

 

   On the other hand I am perhaps more German than present-day Germans, mere Reich Germans, are still capable of being—I the last anti-political German. And yet my ancestors were Polish noblemen: I have preserved from them much racial instinct, who knows? Ultimately even the liberum veto. When I consider how often I am addressed as a Pole and by Poles themselves, how rarely I am taken for a German, it might appear that German has only been sprinkled on to me.

 

   另一方面,比起今日德意志帝國的德國人,我是更道地的德國人,因為我不受政治所局限。可是我祖先是荷蘭貴族,血濃於水,種族本能可能尚存,甚至因而時常被認定是荷蘭人。我雖然一心要當德國人,人家不認我,心中難免有戚戚焉。

         4

  I have never understood the art of arousing enmity towards myself—this too I owe to my incomparable father—even when it seemed to me very worthwhile to do so. However unchristian it may seem, I am not even inimical towards myself, one may turn my life this way and that, one will only rarely, at bottom only once, discover signs that anyone has borne ill will towards me—perhaps, however, somewhat too many signs of good will..

 

   感謝父親的教誨,我學會如何善待自己。

 

   

  

    

 

  

      

Uncanny Strangeness

November 11, 2007

Freud: The Uncanny Strangeness

佛洛伊德:神秘的陌生感

Explicitly given limited scope, as it was at first connected with esthetic problems and emphasized texts by E.T. A. Hoffmann, Freud’s Das Unheimliche ( 1919) surreptitiously goes beyond that framework and the psychological phenomenon of “ uncanny strangeness” as well, in order to acknowledge itself as an investigation into anguish generally speaking and, in a fashion that is even more universal, into the dynamics of the unconscious.

佛洛伊德的在1919年提出「潛意識觀」,最初是跟霍夫曼的「沙人」的小說所強調的美學問題有關,很明確地限制於某個範圍,但是後來卻不知不覺超越那個範圍以及「神秘的陌生感」的心理現象。他要自承是在研究一般所謂的「痛楚」,而且用更加普遍性的方式,研究「無意識的動力學」。

Indeed, Freud wanted to demonstrate at the outset, on the basis of a semantic study of the German adjective heimlich and its antonym unheimlich that a negative meaning close to that of the antonym is already tied to the positive term Heimlich, “ friendily comfortable,” which would also signify “ concealed , kept from sight,” “ deceitful and malicious,” behind someone’s back.”

的確,佛洛伊德一開頭想要根據德文形容詞heimlich 跟它的相反詞unhimlich

證明,在正面意義的詞語heimlich「安詳舒適」,本身已經具有類似相反詞的負面的意義,意謂著「隱藏、不為人所知」「欺瞞而不懷好意」「在人背後」。

Thus, in the very word heimlich, the familiar and intimate are reversed into their opposites, brought together with the contrary meaning of “ uncanny strangeness” harbored in unheimlich.

因此,本是熟悉親密的「安詳舒適」這個詞語,被倒轉成它的相反詞,跟不安詳舒適所具有「神秘的陌生感」相同並列。

Such an immanence of the strange within the familiar is considered as an etymological proof of the psychoanalytic hypothesis according to which “ the uncanny is that class of the frightening which leads back to what is known of old and long familiar,” which as far as Freud is concerned, was confirmed by Schelling who said that “ everything is unheimlich that ought to have remained secret and hidden but has come to light.”

在熟悉之中,陌生之感卻常在,這被認為精神分析學學說在字源學的證據:「神秘令人害怕,追溯其本源卻我們熟悉已久之物」。佛洛伊德先發其言,哲學家

謝林則證實「無意識本應該保持秘密及隱藏,卻讓其招搖在外。」

Consequently therefore, that which is strangely uncanny would be that which was ( the past tense is important) familiar and, under certain conditions ( which ones?) emerges. A first step was taken that removed the uncanny strangeness from the outside, where fright had anchored it, to locate it inside, not inside the familiar considered as one’s own and proper, but the familiar potentially tainted with strangeness and referred ( beyond its imaginative origin) to an improper past. The other is my ( “ own and proper” ) conscious.

因此結果是:現在神秘陌生感過去其實是熟悉,並且在某種條件下就會出現。

我們首先採取的步驟是從外面驅除神秘的陌生感,因為恐懼駐紮在那裡,為了在內部找到它,不是在被認為是它本體的熟悉的內部,而是在潛在沾染陌生的熟悉部份,被認為是不是本體的過去。他者就是我的意識,反成為自己的本體。

What “ familiar”? What “ past” ? In order to answer such question, Freud’s thought played a strange trick on the esthetic and psychological notion of “ uncanny strangeness,” which had been initially posited, and rediscovered the analytical notions of anxiety, double, repetition, and unconscious.

什麼是「熟悉」?什麼是「過去」?為了回答這個問題,佛洛伊德的思想對於「神秘的陌生」的美學及心理觀念,扮演一個奇怪的詭計。它早先被提出來,然後在「憂慮」「雙重人」「重複」「無意識」等分析觀念中,又重新被提起。

The uncanny strangeness that is aroused in Nathaniel ( in Haffmann’s tale, The Sandman) by the paternal figure and its substitute , as well as references to the eyes, is related to the castration anxiety experienced by the child, which was repressed but surfaced again on the occasion of a state of love.

神秘的陌生感在霍夫曼的小說「沙人」的主角Nathaniel身上被喚起,因為父權的人物和代理,以及提到眼睛。這些都跟小孩所經驗到的受到壓抑的去勢憂慮有關。雖然被壓抑,但是在戀愛的場合又會浮上表面。

P182

Strangers to ourselves by Julia Kristeva

Translated by Springhero 雄伯

https://springhero.wordpress.com

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

           

By Kristiva

The Strange Within Us 內心的陌生感

 

The Uncanny would thus be the royal way ( but in the sense of the court, not of the king) by means of which Freud introduced the fascinated rejection of the other at the heart of that “ our self,” so poised and dense, which precisely no longer exists ever since Freud and shows itself to be a strange land of borders and othernesses ceaselessly constructed and deconstructed. Strangely enough, there is no mention of foreigners in the Unheimliche.

神秘因此是直達天聽的皇家之路(借用捷徑的說法,跟國王無涉)。佛洛伊德以此介紹我們內心的「自我」以「他者」的姿態的被排斥出來,令我們深感興趣。

自佛洛伊德之後,泰然自若的「自我」一詞不復存在,表現自己成為一塊陌生的邊陲土地,而「他者」一詞卻不斷地建構復解構。說來奇怪,佛洛伊德原有的Unheimlich 的「外邦人」用詞,不再有人提起

 

Actually, a foreigner seldom arouses the terrifying anguish provoked by death, the female sex, or the “ baleful” unbridled drive. Are we nevertheless so sure that the “ political” feelings of zenophobia do not include often unconsciously, that agony of frightened joyfulness that has been called unheimlich, that in English is uncanny, and the Greeks quite simply call xenos, “ foreign”?

實際上,一位外邦人無論是死亡、異性、或「有邪念」的無法控制的欲求,所引起的痛苦,我們很少在意。可是,我們就如此確定,對於「外邦人恐懼症」所產生的政治感,並沒有潛在地包含佛洛伊德所謂的「無意識」,其實是歡樂受到驚嚇所產生的痛苦,英文所謂的「神秘」,希臘人簡單地稱之為zenos「外來」?

In the fascinated rejection that the foreigner arouses in us, there is a share of uncanny strangeness in the sense of the depersonalization that Freud discovered in it, and which takes up again our infantile desires and fears of the other—the other of death, the other of woman, the other of uncontrollable drive.

外邦人在我們內心所以起的迷人排斥中,分享著神秘的陌生感,或「除去個人化」,如佛洛伊德所發現的。它再一次引起我們對於「他者」嬰兒般的欲望跟恐懼,也就是死亡的他者、女性的他者、無法控制的欲求的他者。

 

 The foreigner is within us. And when we flee from or struggle against the foreigner, we are fighting our unconscious—that “ improper” facet of our impossible “ own and proper.” Delicately, analytically, Freud does not speak of foreigners: he teaches us how to detect foreignness in ourselves. That is perhaps the only way not to hound it outside of us. After Stoic cosmopolitanism, after religious universalist integration, Freud brings us the courage to call ourselves disintegrated in order not to integrate foreigners and even less so to hunt them down, but rather to welcome them to that uncanny strangeness, which is as much theirs as it is ours.

外邦人在我們內心。當我們逃離外邦人或跟他博鬥,我們是在跟我們的無意識戰鬥。無意識是我們難於捍衛的「生命本體」的外來體。佛洛伊德雖然分析,卻巧妙地避談外邦人。他只是教導我們如何去偵察我們內心的外來感。那可能是唯一的方法避免到外面去尋找。雖然禁欲學派教導普世氾用論,宗教也主張舉世皆準的原則,佛洛伊德卻帶給我們勇氣自承割裂,為了不要將外邦人驅除,更不用去捕捉他們。相反地,我們要歡迎那種神秘的陌生感,既屬於外邦人,亦屬於我們自己。

 

In fact, such a Freudian distraction or discretion concerning the “ problem of foreigners”—which appears only as an eclipse or, if one prefers, as a symptom, through the recall of the Geeks word zenoi—might be interpreted as an invitation ( a utopic or very modern one?) not to reify the foreigner, not to petrify him as such, or to petrify us as such. But to analyze it by analyzing us.

事實上,「外邦人的問題」,假如我們回想一下希臘文的用詞zenoi,聽起來像是月蝕或亦可以稱之為病癥。佛洛伊德這樣的分心或謹慎,可以被解釋是邀請我們到烏托邦或現代的理想社會,因此不要將外邦人具體化,不要將僵化他們,也不要僵化我們自已,而是要分析我們自己,來分析他們。

 

To discover our disturbing otherness, for that indeed is what busts in to confront that “ demon,” that threat, that apprehension generated by the projective apparition of the other at the heart of what we persist in maintaining as a proper, solid “ us..” By recognizing our uncanny strangeness we shall neither suffer from it nor enjoy it from the outside.

我們要找出令人困擾的他者,因為那確實就是就們必須與之相博鬥的「惡魔」,威脅、和憂慮。他者在我們持續維護當著堅固「本體自我」的城池,神出鬼沒,魅影幢幢。

 

By recognizing our uncanny strangeness we shall neither suffer from it nor enjoy it from the outside. The foreigner is within me, hence we are all foreigners. If I am a foreigner, there are no foreigners. Therefore Freud does not talk about them. The ethics of psychoanalysis implies a politics: it would involve a cosmopolitanism of a new sort that, cutting across governments, economies, and markets, might work for a mankind whose solidarity is founded on the consciousness of its unconscious — desiring, destructive , fearful, empty, impossible.

體認到我們神秘的陌生感,我們將不會從外面去感受痛苦或喜悅。外邦人在我們內心,因此我們都是外邦人。假如我自己就是外邦人,那麼外邦人就不復存在。因此佛洛伊德避談這個問題。精神分析學暗含政治學,牽涉到普世氾用論,跨越了政府、經濟、跟市場,可以應用到全人類,因為大家的意識都是建立在無意識之上:欲望、毀滅、恐懼、空虛、不可能。

 

Here we are far removed from a call to brotherhood, about which one has already ironically pointed out its debt to paternal and divine authority—“ In order to have brothers there must be a father,” as Louis-Fancois Veuillot did not fail to say when he sharply addressed humanists.

在此我們離愛兄弟如己的呼籲甚遠,因為我們已經反諷地指出,愛兄弟如已必須以肯定上帝的父權為前提。「先有父親,始有兄弟」如Louis-Francois Veuillot 侃侃而談人本主義時,所必然提出的。

  

On the basis of an erotic, death-bearing unconscious, the uncanny strangeness—a projection as well as a first working out of death drive—which adumbrates the work of the “ second” Freud, the one of Beyond the Pleasure Principle, sets the difference within us in its most bewildering shape and presents it as the ultimate condition of our being with others.

無意識兼具性慾及死亡衝動,神秘的陌生感是一種投射,也是死亡衝動的最初建構,佛洛伊德以此為基礎,描繪出他的第二部著作「超越快樂原則」,區分我們內心的這個差異,以最令人困惑的方式,呈現它當著我們跟別人相處的最後狀況。

 

P191

Strangers To Ourselves by Julia Kristiva

Translated by Springhero 雄伯

https://springhero.wordpress.com

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw