拉岡講座211

拉岡講座211

The optics of the blinds
瞎子的光學

3
We can apprehend this privilege of the gaze in the function of desire, by pouring ourselves, as it were, along the veins through which the domain of vision has been integrated into the field of desire.

我們能在欲望的功用中,理解到凝視這這個特權。也就是讓自己激情的脈動奮張,而使視覺的領域跟欲望的領域合而為一

It is not for nothing that it was at the very period when the Cartesian meditation inaugurated in all its purity the function of the subject that the dimension of optics that I shall distinguish here by calling ‘geometral’ or ‘flat’ (as opposed to perspective) optics was developed. I shall illustrate for you, by one object among others, what seems to me exemplary in a function that so curiously attracted
so much reflection at the time.

這並非毫無意義,笛卡爾的沉思在純淨的狀態時開啟了主體的功用的時刻,視覺的向度也被發展。
這個視覺向度,在此我稱之為「幾何」或「平面」(相對於透視法)作為區別。我現在以其中一個客體,為你們說明當時頗受大家好奇關注的一個功用的例子

One reference, for those who would like to carry further what I tried to convey to you today, is Baltrusaitis’ book, Anamorphoses.

你們若對於我今天所要表達的內容有更深入的興趣的話,讓我舉包魯沙提的書「歪像」作為例子。

In my seminar, I have made great use of the function of anamorphosis, in so far as it is an exemplary structure. What does a simple, non-cylindrical anamorphosis consist of?

在我的講座,我曾好幾次使用過「歪像」的功用,因為那是典型的結構。一個簡單而非圓柱形的歪像是如何構成的?

Suppose there is a portrait on this flat piece of paper that I am holding. By chance, you see the blackboard, in an oblique position in relation to the piece of paper. Suppose that, by means of a series of ideal threads or lines, I reproduce on the oblique surface each point of the image drawn on my sheet of paper. You can easily imagine what the result would be—you would obtain a figure enlarged and distorted according to the lines of what may be called a perspective.

假如有一幅肖像放在我手拿的這張平面的紙上。偶然地,你們會到黑板跟這張紙形成一個歪斜的位置。假如憑藉一連串的完美的線條,我將我這張紙上所描繪的影像的每一點,都複製在這張歪斜的表面上。你們很容易想像出來結果是什麼?你們會得到一個被放大而扭曲的圖形,依照所謂透視法的線條。

One supposes that I take away that which has helped in the construction, namely, the image placed in my own visual field—the impression I will retain, while remaining in that place, will be more or less the same. At least, I will recognize the general outtlines of the image—at best, I will have an identical
impression.

有人認為,我抽取掉在建構圖形的輔助的東西,換言之,被放置在我視覺領域的影像。我將會保留的印象,若是一直放在那裡,將大約是大同小異。至少,我將認出那個影像的一般輪廓。最佳時,我的印象還會是一模一樣。

I will now pass around something that dates from a hundred earlier, from 1533, a reproduction of a painting that, I think, you all know—Hans Holbein’s The Ambassadors. It will serve to refresh the memories of those who know the picture well. Those who do not should examine it attentively. I shall come back to it shortly.

我現在給你們傳閱一張起源於1533年的複製圖畫,你們大家都知道的漢斯、霍邊的「大使」。這張圖畫可以用來讓你們對它耳熟能詳的人溫故知新。那些不熟悉的人應該仔細地審察一番。我等一下再回頭談它。

Vision is ordered according to a mode that may generally be called the function of images. This function is defined by a point-by-point correspondence of two unities in space. Whatever optical intermediaries may be used to establish their relation, whether their image is virtual, or real, the point-by-point correspondence is essential. That which is of the mode of the image in the field of vision is therefore reducible to the simple schema that enables us to establish anamorphosis, that is to say, to the relation of an image, in so far as it is linked to a surface, with a certain point that we shall call the ‘geometral’ point. Anything that is determined by this method, in which the straight line plays its role of being the path of light, can be called an image.

視覺是依照我們一般所稱為的影像的功用的模式來規劃秩序。這種功用被定義為空間的兩個一致實體點對點的對應。不管你用怎樣的視覺的仲介來建立這個關係,無論他們的影像是虛擬,或真實,點對點的一致對應是必須的。因此,存在於視覺領域的影像的模式的東西,將會被簡化成為一個簡單的基型。憑藉這個基型,我們能夠建立「歪像」,換言之,變成一個影像的關係,因為這個影像跟表面連接在一起,有某些我們將稱為「幾何學」的點。以這個方法建立的東西都能夠被稱為影像,因為這個方法是以直線充當光線的途徑的來運作。

Art is mingled with science here. Leonardo da Vinci is both a scientist, on account of his dioptric constructions, and an artist. Vitruvius’s treatise on architecture is not far away. It is in Vignola and in Alberti that we find the progressive interrogation of the geometral laws of perspective, and it is around
research on perspective that is centred a privileged interest for the domain of vision—whose relation with the institution of the Cartesian subject, which is itself a sort of geometral point, a point of perspective, we cannot fail to see. And, around the geometral perspective, the picture—this is a very important function to which we shall return—is organized in a way that is quite new in the history of painting.

在此藝術跟科學融合在一起。因為他的視覺建構,李奧納多、達文西既是科學家,也是藝術家。維魯韋思討論建築的論文是不久以前的事。然而,從維格諾拉及亞伯提,我們發現到對於幾何學透視法,提出進步觀點的質疑。那篇質疑研究在視覺領域專注某一個特別的興趣的透視法,那個透視法的研究,跟笛卡爾的主體的關係,我們一定會看得來,因為那個主體本身是一種幾何學的點,一種透視法的點。繞著這個幾何學的透視法,這幅圖畫的構成方式,在繪畫史上是頗為新潁的。這是一個很重要的功用,我們等一回再回來討論。

I should now like to refer you to Diderot. The Lettre sur les aveugles a l’usage do ceux qui voient (Letter on the Blind for the use of those who see) will show you that this construction allows that which concerns vision to escape totally. For the geometral space of vision—even if we include those imaginary parts in the virtual space of the mirror, of which, as you know, I have spoken at length—is perfectly reconstructible, imaginable, by a blind man.

我想要推薦你們看狄特羅的這篇作品。「論盲人對於眼睛能視者的啟示」告訴我們,因為這種建構,顯示有些東西,視覺有關的器官完全無法看見。因為視覺的幾何空間,盲人在想像中可完美地重新建構,即使我們包括在鏡子的虛擬空間,那些非真實的部份,如各位知道,我曾詳細討論過。

What is at issue in geometral perspective is simply the mapping of space, not sight. The blind man may perfectly well conceive that the field of space that he knows, and which he knows as real, may be perceived at a distance, and as a simultaneous act. For him, it is a question of apprehending a temporal
function, instantaneity.

在幾何學透視法受到爭議是僅是空間的繪製,而不是視覺。盲人可能完美地構想,他所知道的空間領域,以及他認為是真實的領域,可以從遠距離感覺到。對他而言,問題是如何理解時間的空間,當下性。

In Descartes, dioptrics, the action of the eyes, is represented as the conjugated action of two sticks. The geometral dimension of vision does not exhaust, therefore, far from it, what the field of vision as such offers us as the original subjectifying relation. This is why it is so important to acknowledge the inverted use of perspective in the structure of anamorphosis.

在笛卡爾,光的曲折,是眼睛的動作,由兩個眼瞳的柱狀結合的動作顯現。因此,這個視覺的幾何向度並沒有,絲毫沒有,窮盡如此的視覺領域所提供給我們當原先主體化的關係。這就是為什麼承認透視法在歪像的結構具有翻轉的功用,是很重要的。

It was Durer himself who invented the apparatus to establish perspective. Durer’s ‘lucinda’ is comparable to what, a little while ago, I placed between that blackboard and myself, namely, a certain image, or more exactly a canvas, a trellis that will be traversed by straight lines—which are not necessarily rays, but also threads—which will link each point that I have to see in the world to a point at which the canvas will, by this line, be traversed.

莒芮自己發明儀器來建立透視法。莒芮的「欄柵」可以類比於剛才我放置在黑板跟我自己之間的東西,換言之,某個影像,或說得準確些,是個帆布,一個欄柵的帆布,被直線的線條穿過,未必是光線,線索也可以,會將我在世界所必然看到的每一點,連接到帆布將會被這個線條穿越過的每一點。

It was to establish a correct perspective image, therefore, that the lucinda was introduced. If I reverse its use, I will have the pleasure of obtaining not the restoration of the world that lies at the end, but the distortion, on another surface, of the image that I would have obtained on the first, and I will dwell, as on some delicious game, on this method that makes anything appear at will in a particular stretching.

因此,這個「欄柵」被介紹,是為了要建立一個正確的透視法影像。假如我倒轉它的用途,我將獲得的快樂,並不是將位在另一端的世界的恢復原狀,而是在另一個表面上扭曲我本來最初會獲得的影像。我再詳述,如同在某些巧妙的遊戲中,依據這個方法,可以使任何東西讓你隨心所欲地出現,當著一種特別的延伸。

I would ask you to believe that such an enchantment took place in its time. Baltrusaltis’ book will tell you of the furious polemics that these practices gave rise to, and which culminated in works of considerable length. The convent of the Minims, now destroyed, which once stood near the rue des Tournelles, carried on the very long wall of one of its galleries and representing as if by chance St John at Patmos a picture that had to be looked at through a hole, so that its distorting value could be appreciated to its full extent.

我想要你們相信,這種障眼畫法在當時盛行。包魯沙提的書會告訴你,這種做法引起熱烈爭議,有無數的作品盛極一時。迷尼教派的女修道院,現在已經被毀滅,有一度位於圖內里,在其長形的畫廊牆壁上有一幅圖畫,畫的是聖約翰在巴摩士。這幅圖畫必須透過一個洞口觀看,這樣它所扭曲的價值才可以充份地被欣賞。

Distortion may lend itself—this was not the case for this particular fresco—to all the paranoiac ambiguities, and every possible use has been made of it, from Arcimboldi to Salvador Dali. I will go so far as to say that this fascination complements what geometral researches into perspective allow to escape from vision. How is it that nobody has ever thought of connecting this with. . . the effect of an erection?

扭曲有助於各種偏執狂的曖昧,從阿西波地到薩爾瓦多、達利,都曾盡情地使用過,不過這個特別的璧畫並不是這樣。容我過份地說,這種對於扭曲的著迷,有助於讓我們看到幾何學對於透視法的研究,發現視覺所逃漏的東西。奇怪的是,為什麼沒有人想到要將這種扭曲,跟陽具勃起的影響連想在一起?

Imagine a tattoo traced on the sexual organ ad hoc in the state of repose and assuming its,
if I may say so, developed form in another state. How can we not see here, immanent in the geometral
dimension—a partial dimension in the field of the gaze, a dimension that has nothing to do with vision as such—something symbolic of the function of the lack, of the appearance of the phallic ghost?

我將它想像成修道者在心平氣和狀態時的一種在性器官上看到的刺青,容我這樣說,然後再將它發展成另一種狀態的形式。我們在此怎會沒有看出一種凝視場域的部份向度?這種向度在幾何學的向量中是根深柢固的,跟視覺本身無多大關係。那就是某件象徵著欠缺的功用,陽具魅影的出現。

Now, in The Ambassadors—I hope everyone has had time now to look at the reproduction —what do you see? What is this strange, suspended, oblique object in the foreground in front of these two figures?

現在,在「大使」這幅畫,我希望每個人有時間去看一下這幅複製品。你會看到什麼?那個在兩位人像面前的前景的這個奇異、懸空、及歪斜的物體是什麼?

The two figures are frozen, stiffened in their showy adornments. Between them is a series of objects that represent in the painting of the period the symbols of vanitas. At the same period, Cornelius Agrippa wrote his .De Vanitate scientiarum, aimed as much at the arts as the sciences, and these objects are all symbolic of the sciences and arts as they were grouped at the time in the trivium and quadrivium. What, then, before this display of the domain of appearance in all its most fascinating forms, is this object, which from some angles appears to be flying through the air, at others to be tilted? You cannot know—for you turn away, thus escaping the fascination of the picture.

這兩位人像穿著他們華麗的服飾,看起來木然呆板。兩人之間有一大堆東西,代表在圖畫的那個時代的浮華世界的象徵。在同一時期,柯梅里寫下他的「浮華藝術的科學」,目的是藝術,也是科學。這些作品都象徵著科學跟藝術融會貫通,在文學院是文法、修辭、及邏輯三科,或算術、幾何、音樂、及天文學四科的時代。

Begin by walking out of the room in which no doubt it has long held your attention. It is then that, turning round as you leave—as the author of the Anamorphoses describes it—you apprehend in this form. . . What? A skull.

你們先從離開房間開始。無疑地,你們在房間裡注視它已經很久。然後,就在你轉身離開的時刻,你理解到這歪斜的形狀是什麼?如同這幅歪像的作者所描述的。什麼?那是一個骷髏頭。

This is not how it is presented at first—that figure, which the author compares to a cuttlebone and which for me suggests rather that loaf composed of two books which Dali was once pleased to place on the head of an old woman, chosen deliberately for her wretched, filthy appearance and, indeed, because
she seems to be unaware of the fact, or, again, Dali’s soft watches, whose signification is obviously less phallic than that of the object depicted in a flying position in the foreground of this picture.

這並不是它最初呈現的樣子。那個人像被作者比喻為骷髏,相反的,我覺得是象徵著用兩本書重疊的那塊麵包,有一次達利很高興將它擺放在一位老婦人的頭上,特意選擇代表她悲慘骯髒的外表。的確,也因為她似乎知道這個事實,達利的柔軟的手錶的意涵,跟這幅圖畫的前景那個飛行位置所描述的物體比較,顯而易見不是那麼跟陽具有關。

All this shows that at the very heart of the period in which the subject emerged and geometral optics was an object of research, Holbein makes visible for us here something that is simply the subject as annihilated—annihilated in the form that is, strictly speaking, the imaged embodiment of the minus-phi [(—#)] of castration, which for us, centres the whole organization of the desires through the framework of the fundamental drives.

這一切都顯示,在那個主體出現,幾何學的視覺光學是研究目標的巔峰時期,霍邊給我們顯示的,就是某件主體被消滅的事實。主體被消滅,嚴格地說,被呈現在閹割符號的意像的形狀。也就是憑藉基本驅力的架構,閹割的符號作為於欲望的整體組織的核心。

But it is further still that we must seek the function of vision. We shall then see emerging on the basis of vision, not the phallic symbol, the anamorphic ghost, but the gaze as such, in its pulsatile, dazzling and spread out function, as it is in this picture.

但是我們還必須進一步探討視覺的功用。然後我們就看得出來,在這個視覺的基礎上出現的,不是陽具的象徵,一個歪像的魅影,而是凝視的本身,作為悸動、暈眩,及散發的功用,如同在這幅圖畫所顯示的。

This picture is simply what any picture is, a trap for the gaze. In any picture, it is precisely in seeking the gaze in each of its points that you will see it disappear. I shall try to develop this further next time.

這幅圖畫僅僅是作為凝視的陷阱的眾多圖畫之一。無論任何圖畫,確實就是你在它的每個點尋找凝視時,你會發現主體消失不見。這一點我下一次再討論。

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: