塊莖思維 10

A Thousand Plateau by Deleuze and Gattari

德勒茲及瓜達里:千高台

 

Introduction: Zhizome

導論:塊莖思維10

 

At the same time, we are on the wrong track with all these geographical distributions. An impasse.

 

同時,我們因為所有這些地理上的分配,處於錯誤的路徑。一個僵局。

 

So much the better. If it is a question of showing that rhizomes also have their own, even more rigid, despotism and hierarchy, then fine and good: for there is no dualism, no ontological dualism between here and there, no axiological dualism between good and bad, no blend or American synthesis.

 

這樣更好。假如問題顯現出,塊莖也有自己的,甚至是更加嚴格的專制跟階層,那麼沒什麼不好:因為沒有二元論,在此地與彼地之間,沒有本體的二元論,沒有善與惡之間沒有價值的二元論,沒有混合或美國式的綜合。

 

There are knots of arborescence in rhizomes, and rhizomatic offshoots in roots. Moreover, there are despotic formations of immanence and channelization specific to rhizomes, just as there are anarchic deformations in the transcendent system of trees, aerial roots, and subterranean stems.

 

塊莖有樹狀的結,而根有塊莖的衍生。而且,有塊莖特有的專制的內在性隊形及水道化,正如樹、空中之根,及地下莖幹的超驗系統,有無政府般的解散隊形。

 

The important point is that the root-tree and canal-rhizome are not two opposed models: the first operates as a transcendent model and tracing, even if it engenders its own escapes; the second operates as an immanent process that overturns the model and outlines a map, even if it constitutes its own hierarchies, even if it gives rise to a despotic channel.

 

重要的是,根及樹與水道塊莖並不是相對的模式:前者運作當著超驗模式及蹤跡,即使它產生自己的逃避,後者運作當著一個內在性的過程,推翻模式並畫出地圖輪廓,即使它組成自己的階層,即使它產生一個專制的水道。

 

It is not a question of this or that place on earth, or of a given moment in history, still less of this or that category of thought. It is a question of a model that is perpetually in construction or collapsing, and of a process that is perpetually prolonging itself, breaking off and starting

up again. No, this is not a new or different dualism.

 

這個問題不是地球上的此地或彼地,歷史上的某個時刻,更不是思想的這個或那個範疇。這個問題是,模式永遠在建造及崩塌,過程永遠在延長自己,中斷,然後又再開始。不,這並非是一個新或不同的二元論。

 

The problem of writing: in order to designate something exactly, anexact expressions are utterly unavoidable.

 

這是寫作的問題:為了要明確地指明某件東西,確實的表達是完全無可避免的。

 

Not at all because it is a necessary step, or because one can only advance by approximations: anexactitude is in no way an approximation; on the contrary, it is the exact passage of that which is under way.

 

這倒不是必須的步驟,或是因為我們只能憑藉靠近,才能前進。確實根本與靠近無關,相反的,它是進行中的事物的確實過程。

 

We invoke one dualism only in order to challenge another. We employ a dualism of models only in order to arrive at a process that challenges all models.

 

我們召喚一個二元論,只是為了挑戰另一個二元論。我們運用一個模式的二元論,只是為了到達挑戰一切模式的過程。

 

Each time, mental correctives are necessary to undo the dualisms we had no wish to construct but through which we pass.

 

每一次,精神上的改正是必須的,為了要拆解我們並不希望建造,但又通過的二元論。

 

Arrive at the magic formula we all seek-PLURALISM = MONISM-via all the dualisms that are the enemy, an entirely necessary enemy, the furniture we are forever rearranging.

 

得到這個我們都盼望以求的神奇的公式:透過所有敵對的二元論,一個完全需要的敵對,我們永遠重新佈置的傢俱,多元論等於一元論。

 

 

Let us summarize the principal characteristics of a rhizome: unlike trees or their roots, the rhizome connects any point to any other point, and its traits are not necessarily linked to traits of the same nature; it brings into play very different regimes of signs, and even nonsign states.

 

讓我們替塊莖的主要特性做個總結:不像樹或根,塊莖連接任何點到任何點,它的特性未必連接到相同性質的特性;它扮演不同的符號統治,甚至是非符號的國家。

 

The rhizome is reducible neither to the One nor the multiple. It is not the One that becomes Two or even directly three, four, five, etc.

 

塊莖既無法化減到大一統,也無法化減到多重性。它不是可分裂為二,或甚至三、四、五等等的大一統。

 

It is not a multiple derived from the One, or to which One is added (n + 1). It is composed not of units but of dimensions, or rather directions in motion. It has neither beginning nor end, but always a middle (milieu) from which it grows and which it overspills.

 

它不是從大一統得來,或大一統無限增加的的多重性、它的組成不是單位,而是向量,或是動作的方向。它既沒有開始,也沒有結束,而總是是中間的(環境),它從那裡成長,並流溢出去。

 

It constitutes linear multiplicities with n dimensions having neither subject nor object, which can be laid out on a plane of consistency, and from which the One is always subtracted (n – 1).

 

它組成直線的多重性,既沒有主體也沒有客體的無限的向量,能夠被安置在一貫性的平面,從那裡大一統總是一再被扣除(無限減一)。

 

When a multiplicity of this kind changes dimension, it necessarily changes in nature as well, undergoes a metamorphosis.

 

當這種多重性改變向量,它的性質也必須改變,經歷蛻變。

 

Unlike a structure, which is defined by a set of points and positions, with binary relations between the points and bi-univocal relationships between the positions, the rhizome is made only of lines: lines of segmentarity and stratification as its dimensions, and the line of flight or deterritorialization as the maximum dimension after which the multiplicity undergoes metamorphosis, changes in nature.

 

不像由一組點及位置所定位的結構,這個結構在點與點之間的二元關係,位置之間有兩個單一組成的關係。塊莖只是路線組成:分割及階層的路線當著它的向量,逃離路線解轄域當著最大向量,多重性跟在後面,經歷蛻變,性質上改變。

 

These lines, or lineaments, should not be confused with lineages of the arborescent type, which are merely localizable linkages between points and positions.

 

這些路線或輪廓,不應該跟樹狀類型的系譜混淆,後者僅僅是點與位置之間的地區性的系譜。

 

Unlike the tree, the rhizome is not the object of reproduction: neither external reproduction as image-tree nor internal reproduction as tree-structure.

 

跟樹不一樣,塊莖並不是繁殖的客體,既不是作為意象之樹的外在的繁殖,也不是作為樹的結構的內在繁殖。

 

The rhizome is an antigenealogy. It is a short-term memory, or antimemory. The rhizome operates by variation, expansion, conquest, capture, offshoots.

 

塊莖是反系譜學的。它是短期記憶,或反記憶。塊莖的運作是變化、擴張、征服、捕捉、衍生。

 

Unlike the graphic arts, drawing, or photography, unlike tracings, the rhizome pertains to a map that must be produced, constructed, a map that is always detachable, connectable, reversible, modifiable, and has multiple entryways and exits and its own lines of flight.

 

不像圖表藝術,繪圖,或攝影,不像蹤跡,塊莖適合於必須被製作、建造的地圖。這個地圖總是能夠拆卸,連接,倒轉,修正,有多重的入口跟出口,以及自己的逃離路線。

 

It is tracings that must be put on the map, not the opposite. In contrast to centered (even

polycentric) systems with hierarchical modes of communication and preestablished paths, the rhizome is an acentered, nonhierarchical, nonsignifying system without a General and without an organizing memory or central automaton, defined solely by a circulation of states.

 

蹤跡,而不是相反,必須被放置在地圖上。對比於擁有溝通的階層模式及預先建立的管道的中央(甚至是多重中央)的系統,塊莖是非中央的,非階層的,非符號的系統,沒有將軍,沒有組織化的記憶或中央自動機械,只是由狀態的流通來定位。

 

 

What is at question in the rhizome is a relation to sexuality–but also to the animal, the vegetal, the world, politics, the book, things natural and artificial–that is totally different from the arborescent relation: all manner of “becomings.”

 

塊莖受到質疑的地方,不但是跟性的關係,而且跟動物,植物,世界,政治,書籍,自然及人為的事物的關係。那完全不同於樹狀關係:各種的「生成」的方式。

 

雄伯譯

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

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: