布希亞論誘拐 05

布希亞論誘拐 05 Baudrillard on Seduction

Translated by Springhero 雄伯譯

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

 

This strength of the feminine is that of seduction.

女性的力量就是誘拐的力量。

 

One may catch a glimpse of another, parallel universe (the two never meet) with the decline of psychoanalysis and sexuality as strong structures, and their cleansing within a psy and molecular universe (that of their final liberation). A universe that can no longer be interpreted in terms of psychic or psychological relations, nor those of repression and the unconscious, but must be interpreted in the terms of play, challenges, duels, the strategy of appearances – that is, the terms of seduction. A universe that can no longer be interpreted in terms of structures and diacritical oppositions, but implies a seductive reversibility – a universe where the feminine is not what opposes the masculine, but what seduces the masculine.

 

我們可以瞥見另一個平行的宇宙(這兩個宇宙永不相會)。一個是精神分析學跟性愛作為強壯結構的衰落,另一個她們在心理及分子的宇宙內的肅清。這個宇宙的詮釋,不再是精神或心理的關係,也不是壓抑跟無意識的方式,而是遊戲,挑戰,決鬥,表現策略的方式,換言之,誘拐的方式。這個宇宙的詮釋,不再是結構跟男女有別的對立,而是暗示誘拐的倒轉。在這個宇宙,女性不再是男性的對立,而是誘拐男性。

 

In seduction the feminine is neither a marked nor an unmarked term. It does not mask the “autonomy” of desire, pleasure or the body, or of a speech or writing that it has supposedly lost(?). Nor does it lay claim to some truth of its own. It seduces. To be sure, one calls the sovereignty of seduction feminine by convention, the same convention that claims sexuality to be fundamentally masculine. But the important point is that this form of sovereignty has always existed – delineating, from a distance, the feminine as something that is nothing, that is never “produced,” is never where it is produced (and certainly cannot, therefore, be found in any “feminist” demand). And this not from the perspective of a psychic or biological bi-sexuality, but that of the trans-sexuality of seduction which the entire organization of sex tends to reject – as does psychoanalysis in accordance with the axiom that there is no other structure than that of sexuality (which renders it incapable, by definition, of speaking about anything else).

 

 在誘拐時,女性既不是一個已標示或無名的用詞。它並沒有飾慾望,歡樂或身體的「自主權」,或是據說它已經喪失的言談及寫作的「自主權」。它也沒有宣稱擁有屬於自己的真理。女性誘拐。的確,傳統上我們宣稱誘拐的統治權在女性,相同的傳統卻又宣稱性愛基本上是男性。但是重點是,這種統治權總是存在,站在遠處描述女性當著某件空無的東西,未曾產生過,永不在被產生的地方(因此,當然無法在「女性主義者」所要求的地方找得到。)這樣說不是從心理學或生物學的兩性差異的觀點,而是誘拐的跨越男女性別,雖然受到全部的性別的組織所排斥,如同精神分析學的定理是:除了性愛的結構外,別無結構(根據這個定義,精神分析學變成無法談論任何其他事情)。

 

What does the women’s movement oppose to the phallocratic structure? Autonomy, difference, a specificity of desire and pleasure, a different relation to the female body, a speech, a writing but never seduction. They are ashamed of seduction, as implying an artificial presentation of the body, or a life of vassalage and prostitution. They do not understand that seduction represents mastery over the symbolic universe, while power
represents only mastery of the real universe. The sovereignty of seduction is incommensurable with the possession of political or sexual power.

 

這個女性運動拿什麼跟陽具結構對立呢?自主權,差異性,慾望跟歡樂的專殊化,女人身體的不同關係,寫作但永不是誘拐。她們把誘拐當著是羞辱,暗示著是矯揉造作地呈現身體,或是侍女及妓女的生涯。她們不瞭解,誘拐代表對於符號宇宙的掌控,而權力代表的只是對於真實宇宙的掌控。誘拐的統治權跟政治或性愛權力的擁有,不能相提並論。

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: