Zizek 03

Organs without bodies by Zizek 紀傑克:沒有身體的器官

Translated by Springhero 雄伯譯

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

 

When the Fantasy Fails Apart

幻見崩塌時

 

One should here go to a crucial step further into the disintegration of fantasy. David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive perfectly depicts this gradual disintegration. The two main stages of this process are, first, the excessively intense acting in the test scene, and, then, when the autonomous partial object ( “ organ without a body” )emerges in the scene in the nightclub Silenicie. Here, the movement is from the excess, which is still contained in reality although already disturbing it, sticking out of it, to its full autonomization, which causes the disintegration of reality itself; say, from the pathological distortion of a mouth to the mouth leaving the body and floating around as a spectral partial object ( the same as in Syberberg’s Parsifal, in which we pass from the wound on the body to the wound as autonomous organ without a body, outside it). This excess is what Lacan calls lamella, the infinitely plastic object that can transpose itself from one to another medium: from excessive ( trans-semantic) scream to a stain ( or anamorphic visual distortion). Is this not what takes place in Much’s Scream ? The scream is silent, a bone stuck in the throat, a stoppage that cannot be vocalized and can express itself only in the guise of s silent visual distortion, curving the space around the screaming subject.

 

我們應該更進重要的一步探討幻見的崩塌。大衛、林區的「穆荷蘭大道」描述這種逐漸的崩塌,可說是淋漓盡致。這個過程的兩個主要舞台,首先是測試場景的激情演出,然後,當自主的部分客體(沒有身體的器官)出現在「西蘭尼」夜總會的場景。在此,動作已經不再有真實中蘊含的激情,雖然仍受干擾,冒升出來,自主行動,而引起真實本身的崩塌,換言之,嘴巴一個個病態地變形,離開身體,到處飄蕩當著魅影的部分客體(跟辛伯格的「巴西非」一樣,我們身體上的傷口到外面沒有身體的器官)。這種過度就是拉岡所說的「薄膜」,純粹膠狀般的客體能夠自主地到處轉移,從過度的(語意上的比擬)喊叫,到汙點(或變形的視覺的扭曲)。這不就是孟克的「吶喊」?吶喊是無聲的,骨頭卡在喉嚨,無法發聲的停頓,卻依舊偽裝無聲的視覺扭曲來表達自己,而扭曲吶喊主體四周的空間。

 

    In Silencio, where Betty and Rita go after successfully making love, a singer sings Roy Orbison’s “ Crying” in Spanish. When the singer collapses, the song goes on. At this point, the fantasy collapses too—not in the sense that, from within,  as it were, fantasy loses its mooring in reality and gets autonomized, as a pure spectral apparition of a bodiless “ undead” voice ( a rendering of the Real of the Voice similar to that at the beginning of Sergio Leone’s Once upon a Time in America, in which we see a phone ringing loudly, and, when a hand picks up the receiver, the ringing goes on). The shot of the voice continuing to sing even when its bodily support collapses is the inversion of the famous Balanchine ballet staging of a short piece by Webern: in this staging, the dancing goes on even after the music stops. We have thus, in one case, the voice that insists even when deprived of its bodily support, and, in the other case, the bodily movements that insist even when deprived of their vocal ( musical) support. The effect is not simply symmetrical because, in the first case, we hav the undead vocal drive, the immortal life, going on, whereas in the second case, the figures that continue to dance are “ dead men dancing,” shadows deprived of their life-substance. However, in both cases what we witness is the dissociation between reality and the real; in both cases the Real insists even when reality disintegrates. This real, of course, is the fantasmatic Real at its purest. And, to put it in Deleuzian terms, is this “ autonomization “ of the partial object not the very moment of the extraction of the virtual from the actual? The status of the “ organ without the body” is that of the virtual—in other words, in the opposition between the virtual and the actual, the Lacanian Real is on the side of the virtual.

 

在「西蘭尼」夜總會,貝蒂跟瑞達興奮地做愛,一位歌手以西班牙語哼唱奧彬森的「哭泣」。當歌手崩潰時,歌聲依舊進行。此時,幻見也崩塌,倒不是「迷霧散開,我們重囘清醒的現實」,而是從裡面,幻見失去在真實的停泊點,以沒有器官的「不死」的聲音的純粹魅影方式,自主行動(聲音扭曲真實界類似李昂尼的「美國往事」,我們看到電話大聲鈴響,一隻手拿起聽筒,鈴聲依舊響著)。身體的支持崩塌後,聲音繼續哼唱的拍攝,跟了維伯的著名芭蕾舞短片相反:在舞台上,音樂已經停止,舞蹈繼續。在前者,喪失身體的支持後,聲音堅持下去;在後者,喪失他們的聲音(音樂)的支持後,身體的動作堅持下去。這種效果不僅僅是均稱,在前者,我們有不死的聲音驅力,不朽的生命進行下去;在後者,持續舞蹈的身體是「死亡者之舞」,喪失他們生命精髓的幽魂。可是,在兩種情形裡,我們都見證到現實界與真實界的分裂。在兩種情形裡,即使現實界崩塌,真實界持續下去。這個真實界當然是將幻見的真實界表現得淋漓盡致。用德樂茲的術語來說,部份客體的「自主化」難道不就是虛擬從現實中抽離出來?「沒有身體的器官」的地位就是虛擬的地位。換言之,在虛擬與現實的對立時,拉岡的真實界是站在虛擬這一邊。

 

   Of course, in all of these cases, the shock effect is followed by an explanation that relocates it back within ordinary reality. In the night club scene in Mulholland Drive, we are warned at the very outset that we are listening to prerecorded music, that the singers just mimic the act of singing; in the case from Leone, the phone we continue to hear ringing after the receiver is picked up is another phone, and so forth. However, what is nonetheless crucial is that, for a short moment, part of reality was (mis)perceived as a nightmarish apparition—and, in a way, this apparition was “ more real than reality itself,” since, in it, the Real shone through. In short, one should discern which part of reality is “ transfunctionalized” through fantasy, so that, although it is part of reality, it is perceived in a fictional mode. Much more difficult than to denounce/unmask ( what appears as ) reality as fiction is to recognize in “ real” reality the part of fiction. Is this not what happens in transference, in which, while we relate to a “ real person: in front of us, we effectively relate to the fiction of, say our father? Recall also Home Alone especially part two. In both parts, there is a cut two-thirds into the film; although the story seems to take place in a continuous diegetic place, it is clear that, with the final confrontation between the small kid and the two robbers, we enter a different ontological realm, a plastic cartoon-space in which there is no death, in which may head can explode, yet I go on as normal in the next scene. Again, part of reality is fictionalized.

 

當然,在所有的情形,震撼效應到頭來還是會被現實界重新被要回去。在「穆荷蘭大道」夜總會的場景,我們一開頭就被警告,我們聽到的是預先錄好的音樂,歌手只是模擬歌唱的動作。在李昂尼的情形,在聽筒已被取下,我們所聽到的電話鈴聲是另外一部電話,等等。可是,重要的是,有那麼一段時刻,部份的現實界被認為或誤認為是夢魘的魅影,而且在某方面,這個魅影比現實界還要更真實,因為真實在裡面光耀。總之,我們應該覺察到,現實界有哪個部份是藉由幻見來「超越功用」,這樣它雖然是現實界的部份,它可被感覺像是幻想模式。除了揭開及抨擊(看起來似乎是)現實界,更困難的是要在「真實」的現實界辯認出幻想的部份。這在移情時時常發生,當我們提到我們面前「真實的人」,我們所提的其實是我們的幻想,例如就父親而言。也回顧一下「獨自在家」這部小說,特別是第二章。這兩章有三分之二被改編成電影。雖然故事似乎是在不斷描述中發生,很明顯的,隨著小孩跟強盜的最後衝突,我們進入不同的本體領域,一個膠狀的沒有死亡的卡通空間,我的頭會爆炸,可是下一場景,我仍舊繼續。再一次,部份的現實界被幻想化。

 

   It is such a fictionalized partial object that also serves as the support of voice. In his advice to young composers, Richard Wagner wrote that, after elaborating the contours of the musical piece one wants to compose, one should erase everything and just focus one’s mind on a lone head floating freely in a dark void and wait for the moment when this white apparition starts to move its lips and sing. This music should be the germ of the work to be composed. Is this procedure not that of getting the partial object to sing? It is not a person’s ( a subject)—the object itself should start to sing.

 

   就是如此一個幻想化的部份客體也充當聲音的支持。李察;華格納有一次勸告年輕作曲家寫到,構想好我們想要作曲的音樂劇的輪廓後,我們應該抹除一切,專注於一個孤獨的頭顱自由地在黑暗的空無中飄蕩,等待這個白色魅影開始移動嘴唇歌唱的時刻。這個音樂應該就是所作之曲的開端。這種程序難道不就是使部份客體開始歌唱的程序嗎?那不是一個人(主體),而是客體本身應該開始歌唱。

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: