拉岡講座238

拉岡講座238

The myth of the lamella
薄膜的神話

4
I wish to note here the relation between the polarity of the drive cycle and something that is always at the centre. It is an organ, in the sense of an instrument, of the drive—in another sense, therefore, than that attributed to it earlier in the sphere of the induction of the Ich. We must now turn our attention to this ungraspable organ, this object that we can only circumvent, in short, this false organ.

我希望在此注意到,驅力的循環極端,跟處於中央的東西,兩者有什麼關係。就工具的意義而言,它是一個欲望驅力的器官。因此,它的意義不同於早先我們將它歸屬於自我的誘導場域。我們現在將注意力轉向這個難於理解的器官。這個器官,我們只能旁敲側擊,總而言之,這個是個虛假的器官。

The organ of the drive is situated in relation to the true organ. In order to make this clear to you and in order to show that this is the only pole that, in the domain of sexuality, is within our grasp, capable of being apprehended, I will take the liberty of setting a myth before you—and in doing so I shall take as my starting-point what is put into the mouth of Aristophanes on the subject of love in Plato’s Symposium.

欲望驅力的器官的位置,跟真正的器官有關聯。為了讓你們明白,為了顯示,在性的場域,這是唯一我們能夠理解的部份,我大膽地跟你提出一則神話。在提出神話時,我將先開始談,在柏拉圖的「嚮宴」裡,亞力斯多分對於愛的主題,是如何的表達。

This usage presupposes of course that we give ourselves permission to use, in this judo with truth, the apparatus that I have always avoided using before my audiences.

當然,使用神話來處理真理的問題,意味著我們容許我們自己採用一種工具,我跟以前的聽眾,總是避免使用的工具。

I have given my listeners ancient models, particularly those drawn from Plato, but I have merely given them the machinery to dig this field. I am not one of those who say—Children, there is treasure buried here—and leave them to get on with their digging. I have given them the plough share and the plough, namely, that the unconscious was made out of language, and at one point in time, approximately three and a half years ago, and three very good pieces of work have resulted from it. But we must now say— You can only find the treasure in the way I tell you.

我曾經對聽眾引用古代的範例,特別是從柏拉圖的對話錄,但是我引用它們只是替我們的領域開路。我不是那種人,光會說「孩子們,這裡有埋藏的寶藏」,然後就聽任他們去挖掘。我會給他們犁一起去挖,這個犁,換言之,就是無意識是由語言構成。在某個時間,大約三年半前,有三篇非常好的作品談到無意識。但是我們現在必須說,你們不妨用我告訴你的方法,去尋找這個寶藏。

There is something comical about this way. This is absolutely essential in understanding any of Plato’s dialogues, and especially when one is dealing with the Symposium. This dialogue is even, one might say, a practical joke. The starting-point, on course, is Aristophanes’ fable. This fable is a defiance to the
centuries, for it traverses them without anyone trying to do better. I shall try.

這個方法有點滑稽的樣子。可是,了解柏拉圖對話錄是絕對必要的,特別是我們在處理「嚮宴」的時候。我們甚至可以說,這個對話錄是一個惡作劇。當然,開始是亞力斯多分的寓言。這個寓言挑戰了好幾世紀,因為它經歷好幾世紀,沒有人能設法表達得比它更好。現在讓我試試看。

In an attempt to establish what was said at the Congrès de Bonneval I managed to come up with something like the following—I am going to talk to you about the lamella.

為了要証實在那個座談所談論的內容,我設法先提出以下的命題,我將先跟你們談有關薄膜的問題。

If you want to stress its joky side, you can call it l’hommelette. This hommelette, as you will see, is easier to animate than primal man, in whose head one always had to place a homunculous to get it working.

假如你們要強調這個薄膜的惡作劇的一面,你們不妨稱之為「處女膜」。你們將會看出,這個處女膜比原始人想像的還更有活力。在他們的腦海,任何東西都要有一層薄膜,才行得通。

Whenever the membranes of the egg in which the foetus emerges on its way to becoming a new-born are broken, imagine for a moment that something flies off, and that one can do it with an egg as easily as with a man, namely the hommelette, or the lamella.

蛋有一層薄膜保護,裡面的蛋卵才會慢慢形成一隻新生的胎兒。當薄膜破掉時,你可以想像某些東西會迸發出來。處理人跟處理蛋的道理,也是一樣。換言之,先要處理那層薄膜。

The lamella is something extra-flat, which moves like the amoeba. It is just a little more complicated. But it goes everywhere. And as it is something—I will tell you shortly why—that is related to what the sexed being loses in sexuality, it is, like the amoeba in relation to sexed beings, immortal—because
it survives any division, any scissiparous intervention. And it can run around.

這個薄膜是某件超薄的東西,像變形蟲那樣移動。但是稍微更複雜些。它到處亂闖。我扼要地說,它的狀況,類似有性的生物在交媾時會喪失的東西。就變形蟲跟有性的生物比較,這個東西永遠存在,因為再怎麼分割,再怎樣仔細的割開,它還會存活,還會到處亂闖。

Well! This is not very reassuring. But suppose it comes and envelopes your face while you are quietly asleep. I can’t see how we would not join battle with a being capable of these properties. But it would not be a very convenient battle. This lamella, this organ, whose characteristic is not to exist, but which is nevertheless an organ—I can give you more details as to its zoological place—is the libido.

嗯!這不太令人安心。但假如你在睡覺的時刻,它過來覆蓋你的臉孔。我不明白,跟具有這些屬性的東西,你要怎樣跟它搏鬥。這個薄膜,這個器官,它的特性無以名,但是它仍然是一個器官。關於它的動物學的位置,我可以列舉得更詳細,那就是生命的力比多。

It is the libido, qua pure life instinct, that is to say, immortal life, or irrepressible life, life that has need of no organ, simplified, indestructible life. It is precisely what is subtracted from the living being by virtue of the fact that it is subject to the cycle of sexed reproduction. And it is of this that all the forms
of the objet a that can be enumerated are the representatives, the equivalents. The objets a are merely its representatives, its figures. The breast—as equivocal, as an element characteristic of the mammiferous organization, the placenta for example —certainly represents that part of himself that the individual loses at birth, and which may serve to symbolize the most profound lost object. I could make the same kind of reference for all the other objects.

這個力比多,作為純粹的本能,換言之,永遠存在的生命,或無法壓抑的生命,不需要器官的生命,單純化,無法毀滅的生命。它隸屬於性的繁殖的循環,因為這樣,它是我們從生物的機能抽取出來的東西。能夠被列舉出來的這些小客體的各種形式,都是力比多的代表,力比多的代理。這些小客體僅僅它的代表,它的代理。例如,乳房是哺乳類生物,或有胎盤類生物的明確特徵,確實代表個體自己在出生時,喪失的那個部份,可以充當象徵那個失落已久的東西。我還可以提到相同的特色,在所有其它的小客體。

The relation between the subject and the field of the Other becomes clearer. Take a look at what I have drawn in the lower part of the table. I will explain.

主體跟大它者領域之間的關係,就變得更加清楚。請看一下,我在黑板上畫的圖表的下面部份。我解釋一下。

In the world of the Real-Ich, of the ego, of knowledge, everything may exist as now, including you and consciousness, without there being any need, whatever may be thought to the contrary, for anything in the way of a subject. If the subject is what I say it is, namely the subject determined by language
and speech, it follows that the subject, in initio, begins in the locus of the Other, in so far as it is there that the first signifier emerges.

在真實自我、自我、或知識的世界,每一樣東西可能像目前這樣存在,包括你跟你的意識,沒有需要任何東西,或是任何相反的東西,阻礙到人作為主體。假如這個主體,就是我所謂的由語言與言說決定的主體,我們可以推論,這個主體最初是從大它者的軌跡開始,因為語言的第一個意符出現在那裡。

Now, what is a signifier? I have been drumming it into you long enough not to have to articulate it once again here. A signifier is that which represents a subject. For whom ?—not for another subject, but for another signifier. In order to illustrate this axiom, suppose that in the desert you find a stone covered with hieroglyphics. You do not doubt for a moment that, behind them, there was a subject who wrote them. But it is an error to believe that each signifier is addressed to you—this is proved by the fact that you cannot understand any of it. On the other hand you define them as signifiers, by the fact that you
are sure that each of these signifiers is related to each of the others. And it is this that is at issue with the relation between the subject and the field of the Other.

現在,什麼是意符?我已經反覆再三說過,現在就不需要再詳述一遍。意符就是主體的代表。對誰的代表?不是對另外一個主體的代表,而是對另外一個意符的代表。為了要舉例說明這個原理,你們不妨假設,你們在沙漠裡找到一塊石頭,上面刻有象形文字。你絲毫不會懷疑,在它們背後,曾有一個人的主體寫下它們。但是不要以為,每一個意符都是為你們而寫,因為你們無法看懂它們,不就已經證明。在另一方面,你們認定象形文字認是一種意符,因為你們確定,每一個意符與其它的意符,都有關聯。就是這一點,主體跟大它者的領域的關係,值得我們注意。

The subject is born in so far as the signifier emerges in the field of the Other. But, by this very fact, this subject—which, was previously nothing if not a subject coming into being —solidifies into a signifier.

主體出生在大它者的領域,意符出現的地方。因為這個事實,主體原先只是一個存在物,凝聚成為一個意符。

The relation to the Other is precisely that which, for us, brings out what is represented by the lamella—not sexed polarity, the relation between masculine and feminine, but the relation between the living subject and that which he loses by having to pass, for his reproduction, through the sexual cycle.
In this way I explain the essential affinity of every drive with the zone of death, and reconcile the two sides of the drive—which, at one and the same time, makes present sexuality in the unconscious and represents, in its essence, death.

跟大它者的關係,確實就是薄膜所代表的東西顯露出來的部份,不是兩性的關係,或男性跟女性之間的關係,而是具有生命的主體,跟主體透過性的繁殖下一代,他所喪失的東西,兩者之間的關係。以這種方式,我解釋每一個欲望驅力,與死亡的領域,會有很重要的關聯。我會調合欲望驅力的兩邊,一方面,欲望驅力使性存在於無意識這一邊,另一方面,欲望驅力本質上又代表死亡。

You will also understand that, If I have spoken to you of the unconscious as of something that opens and closes, it is because its essence is to mark that time by which, from the fact of being born with the signifier, the subject is born divided. The subject is this emergence which, just before, as subject, was nothing, but which, having scarcely appeared, solidifies into a signifier.

你們也要了解到,我跟你們提到的無意識,具有剛一開啟,旋又封閉的特性,那是因為它的本質是要標示,主體一出生就處於分裂狀態的那個時間,因為人做為主體,一誕生,就進入意符的世界。主體僅僅就是剛一出現,就凝聚成為一個意符。

On this conjunction between the subject in the field of the drive and the subject as he appears in the field of the Other, on this effort to join oneself together, depends the fact that there is a support for the ganze Sexualsirebung. There is no other. Only there is the relation of the sexes represented at the level of the unconscious.

性的欲望的凝視,有一個支撐的東西。那就是有賴於,在欲望驅力的這個主體,跟出現在大它者領域的那個主體,彼此之間有一個關聯。除此之外,凝視沒有其它支撐。兩性之間的關係,只有在無意識的層次,才表現得出來。

As for the rest, the sexual relation is handed over to the hazards of the Other. It is handed over to the explanations that are given of it. It is handed over to the old woman of whom—it is not a pointless fable—Daphnis must learn what one must do to make love.

至於其餘,諸如性的關係,可以移送到主體所面對的大它者的情況來處理。由大它者所提供的解釋,視狀況處理。或移轉給媒婆紅娘來指導。我剛才所提到的薄膜或處女膜的寓言,並不是毫無意義:青梅竹馬的男女,自然會學習到如何去做愛。

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: