布希亞論誘拐 04

布希亞論誘拐 04 Baudrillard on Seduction

Translated by Springhero 雄伯

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

 

Freud was right: there is but one sexuality, one libido – and it is masculine. Sexuality has a strong, discriminative structure centered on the phallus, castration, the Name-of-the Father, and repression. There is none other. There is no use dreaming of some non-phallic, unlocked, unmarked sexuality. There is no use seeking, from within this structure, to have the feminine pass through to the other side, or to cross terms. Either the structure remains the same, with the female being entirely absorbed by the male, or else it collapses, and there is no longer either female or male – the degree zero of the structure. This is very much what is happening today: erotic polyvalence, the infinite potentiality of desire, different connections, diffractions, libidinal intensities – all multiple variants of a liberatory alternative coming from the frontiers of a psychoanalysis free of Freud, or from the frontiers of desire free of psychoanalysis. Behind the effervescence of the paradigm of sex, everything is converging towards the non-differentiation of the structure and its
potential neutralization.

 

    佛洛依德説得沒錯:只有一個性愛,只有一個精力,那就是男性。性愛有一個強烈的,睥睨一切的結構,集中在陽具,去勢,父之名,及壓抑。沒有其它結構。夢想會有非陽具,不受鎖禁的,無名的性愛,是沒有用的。設法讓女性從這個結構之內通往到另一邊,或越過限制,是沒有用的。這個結構始終一樣,女性完全被男性所吸收,要不然它會崩坍,不再有女性或男性,成為結構的零度。這就是今天所發生的狀況:性愛多重化,慾望的無限潛力,不同結合,衍射,精力的旺盛,各種來自於跟佛洛依德無關的精神分析學邊境的釋放方式, 或來自於跟精神分析學無關的慾望的邊境。在各種性愛典範的沸騰背後,一切都匯集朝向結構的沒有差異及其潛力的中立。

 

The danger of the sexual revolution for the female is that she will be enclosed within a structure that condemns her to either discrimination when the structure is strong, or a derisory triumph within a weakened structure. The feminine, however, is, and has always been, somewhere else. That is the secret of its strength. Just as it is said that something lasts because its existence is not adequate to its essence, it must be said that the feminine seduces because it is never where it thinks it is, or where it thinks itself. The feminine is not found in the history of suffering and oppression imputed to it – women’s historical tribulations (though by guile it conceals itself therein). It suffers such servitude only when assigned to and repressed within this structure – to which the sexual revolution assigns and represses it all the more dramatically.

 

   女性性愛革命的危險是,她將會被封閉在一個結構之內。她被判定,在結構強壯時,要有所歧視,或在結構虛弱時,她沾沾自喜於勝利。可是,女性從自始至終總是在其它地方。那就是她力量的秘密。如同說,某件東西繼續存在,是因為它的存在不相等於它的本質,我們也必須說,女性誘拐是因為誘拐從來不是在它認為所在的地方,或它自以為的地方。女性不是在大家所歸咎的痛苦及壓抑的歷史中或女人的歷史的災難找到(雖然藉著這樣的狡計,誘拐隱藏其中)。誘拐只有在指定給這個結構之內,並受其壓抑,才會覺得有奴役的痛苦。性愛革命指定誘拐給這個結構,並更加強烈地受其壓抑。

 

But by what aberrant complicity (complicit with what? if not, precisely, the male) would one have us believe that this is the female’s history? Repression is already here in full force, in the narrative of women’s sexual and political misery, to the exclusion of every other type of strength and sovereignty. There is an alternative to sex and to power, one that psychoanalysis cannot know because its axiomatics are sexual. And yes, this alternative is undoubtedly of the order of the feminine, understood outside the opposition masculine/feminine, that opposition being essentially masculine, sexual in intention, and incapable of being overturned without ceasing to exist.

 

但是憑藉怎樣的共謀(跟什麼共謀?難道不就是跟男性?)有人要我們相信,這就是女性的歷史?壓抑今天已經如火如荼地進行,以女人性愛及政治方面的悲慘的敘述,排除其它的力量跟統治。性愛跟權力都有一個精神分析學所不知道的替代的選擇,因為它的定理是性。是的,這個替代選擇毫無疑問是屬於女性的秩序,跳脫男性跟女性的對立始能了解:這個對立基本上是男性,以性愛為意圖,不能被推翻,否則男女對立就不復存在。

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: