拉岡講座249

拉岡講座249
The Subject who is supposed to know
應該知道的主體

Alienation in pleasure
歡樂中的疏離

3
As usual, I must break off a train of thought in order to keep things within certain limits. However, I wish to say something, however briefly, about what I hope to discuss next time. I have illustrated the essential difference on the blackboard, in the form of two schemata.

像平常一樣,我必須中斷我的思緒,才不會天馬行空,漫無邊際。可是,關於下一次我要討論的內容,我希望簡短地提一下。我曾在黑板上,用兩個基型,說明重要的不同所在。

In his text on the Triebe and the Triebschicksale, the drives and the vicissitudes of the drive, Freud places love at once at the level of the real, at the level of narcissism, at the level of the pleasure principle in its correlation with the reality principle, and deduces from this that the function of ambivalence is absolutely different from what occurs in the Verkehrung, in the circular movement. At the level at which love is in question, we have a schema, which, Freud tells us, is spread over two
stages.

在「驅力與驅力的變遷」的一篇文章,佛洛伊德將愛同時放置在真實界的層次、自戀的層次、快樂原則與現實原則的層次。由此推論出,愛恨交加的功用,絕對不同於彼此翻轉的循環運轉。在愛受到質疑的層次,有一個基型,佛洛伊德告訴我們,延伸在兩個階段之上。

First there is an Ich, an Ich defined objectively by the combined functioning of the apparatus of the central nervous system and the condition of homeostasis, to preserve the tensions at the lowest possible level.

首先有一個「我」。這個「我」客觀上由腦神經系統的器官及體內平衡的狀況,共同運作,這樣才能減緩緊張。

We can conceive that what there is outside this, if one can speak of an outside, is merely indifference. And, at this level, since it is a question of tension, indifference simply means non-existence. Freud tells us however that the rule of autoeroticism is not the non-existence of objects, but the functioning of objects solely in relation to pleasure. In the zone of indifference a distinction is made between that which brings Lust and that which brings Unlust, pleasure or displeasure. In any case, did not the ambiguity of the term Lustprinzip become obvious to everyone long ago ?—since some people also write it Unlustprinzip.

我們能夠覺察出,除此而外,假如有所謂外在的話,那就是漠不關心。在這個層次上,因為牽涉到緊張,漠不關心僅是意味著不存在。可是,佛洛伊德告訴我們,性愛的自動並不就是客體的不存在,而是客體與快樂原則的運作。在漠不關心的地帶,帶來快樂跟帶來不快樂的驅力有所不同。無論如何,「快樂原則」這個術語老早以前,大家不就已經明顯覺得是模稜兩可?因為有些人寫下的是「不快樂原則」。

The next problem, then, is how this stage is to be represented— how are homeostasis and pleasure to be articulated? For, the fact that something brings pleasure is still too much for the equilibrium. What is the closest and most accurate schema that can be given of this hypothetical Ich, in which is motivated the first construction of an apparatus functioning as a psyche? I propose the following.

因此,下一個問題是這個階段如何代表?體內平衡與快樂如何清楚表達?某件事情會帶來快樂,這個事實就讓人耿耿於懷。關於這個假設的「我」,心理運作的器官的最早建構,最靠近,最正確的基型是什麼?我建議以下這個小客體存在的證據的圖形。

You see, indicated by the capital letters ICH, the Ich as apparatus tending to a certain homeostasis— which cannot be the lowest because that would be death and, indeed, this was envisaged by Freud in a second stage. As for Lust, this is not a field strictly speaking, it is always an object, an object of
pleasure, which, as such, is mirrored in the ego. This mirror-image, this bi-univocal correlate of the object, is here the purified Lust-Ich of which Freud speaks, namely, that which, in the Ich, is satisfied with the object qua Lust.

你們瞧,這個大寫字母的「我」,作為一種傾向於要得某種平衡的器官,不能擺置在最低位置,因為那是死亡的位置。的確,佛洛伊德在第二階段才構想到它。至於快樂,嚴格來說,它不是一個領域,它總是個客體,一個快樂的客體,如實地反映在這個自我裡。這個鏡子意象,這個客體的兩個單一體,在此是佛洛伊德所提到「我的快樂」,換言之,這個我以快樂作為滿足。

Unlust, on the other hand, is what remains unassimilable, irreducible to the pleasure principle. It is out of this, Freud tells us, that the non-ego will be constituted. It is situated—note well—within the circle of the original ego, it bites into it, without the homeostatic functioning ever managing to reabsorb it. You see here the origin of what we shall find again later in the so-called functioning of the bad object.
You will notice especially that what structures the level of pleasure already gives the beginning of a possible articulation of alienation.

在另一方面,不快樂始終無法被吸收,被化簡到快樂原則。佛洛伊德告訴我們,這個「非自我」的部份就是由不快樂由成。請注意,它的位置就在「原先的自我」的圈子裡。它跟原先的自我緊密相隨,體內平衡的功能卻無法重新將它吸收進來。你們在此看到,我們後來所謂的不好的客體的運作,起源就在此。你們將會特別注意到,快樂層次的結構,就是疏離的表達可能的起源。

In the external zone, Lust says to itself, more or less—Ah! the Ich is really something I must concern myself with. And as soon as it does concern itself with it, the perfect tranquillity of the Ich disappears. The Lust-Ich stands out and, by the same token, Unlust, the foundation of the non-ego, falls back. This does not imply the disappearance of the apparatus, quite the contrary. You simply see being produced at a primitive level that breaking-off, that splitting-off, which I indicated in the dialectic of the subject with the Other, but here in the opposite direction.

在外部的地區,快樂對自己大約是這樣說:「呀!這個我,我必須關心。」一但快樂不關心到自我,這個「我」的沉著寧靜就會消失。這個「快樂的我」突顯出來的同時,作為「非自我」的基礎的不快樂就會後退。這並不意味著,這個器官就這樣消失,完全相反。你們就會看到,在這個原始的層次,會產生中斷及分裂。在主體與大它者的辯證過程,也會有中斷及分裂,但是在這裡,方向相反過來。

This is expressed in the expression, No good without evil, no good without pain, which preserves in this good and in this evil a character of alternation, of a possible calibration, in which the articulation that I gave earlier of a dyad of signifiers will be reduced, and incorrectly. For, to return things at the level of good and evil, everyone knows that hedonism is unable to explain the mechanism of desire. This is because in passing over to the other register, to the alienating articulation, it is expressed quite differently. I almost blush to repeat here such catchphrases as beyond good and evil, which idiots have been playing around with for so long without knowing exactly what they were doing. Nevertheless, we must articulate what occurs at the level of the alienating articulation thus—no evil without there
resulting some good from it, and when the good is there, there is no good that holds with evil.

有一句很貼切的俗語:「善惡相連,福禍相依。」善行及惡行只是程度上的差異,彼此迭替,早先我提到過,意符的對立可以減緩,並不很適當。回到善惡與福禍的層次,大家都知道,享樂主義無法說欲望的機械學。這是因為傳遞到另一方面,傳遞到疏離的表達時,享樂主義的表達截然不同。容我不厭其煩地一再重複「超越善與惡」這個警句,即使是白痴都會樂此不疲地玩弄這個警句,而不知道自己在幹什麼。可是,我們必須表達在疏離的表達的這個層次。即使是惡行的開端,有時也會有善行的結果。至於善行,每個善行都包含某種邪惡。

That is why, by situating itself purely and simply in the register of pleasure, ethics fails and why, quite legitimately, Kant objects to it that the sovereign good can in no way be conceived as some small good carried to infinity. For there is no possible law to be given of what might be the good in objects.

The sovereign good, if this confusing term must be retained, can be found again only at the level of the law, and in Kant avec Sade’ I showed that this means that, at the level of desire, passivity, narcissism and ambivalence are the characteristics that govern the dialectic of pleasure at the level of the table on
the left. Its term is, strictly speaking, what is called identification.

這就是為什麼,倫理學若是將自己定位在僅是快樂原則上,往往功敗垂成。這也是為什麼,康德振振有詞地反對說:「統治的善,絕對不能僅從細微末節的善行,推到極端。」因為不能可有哪一條法則,將善行定位在客體上。統治的善,這個術語本身就有待商榷,只能在法則的層次被找到。在「康德即是沙德」文章中,我曾揭示,在欲望、自戀與愛恨交加的層次,表現的特徵是基於統治快樂原則的辯證法。它的術語,嚴格來說,就是所謂的「自我認同」。

It is the recognition of the drive that enables us to construct, with the greatest certainty, the functioning that I call the functioning of the division of the subject, or alienation. And how has the drive itself been recognized? It has been recognized in this that, far from the dialectic of what occurs in the subject’s
unconscious being able to be limited to the reference to the field of Lust, to the images of beneficent, favourable objects, we have found a certain type of objects which, in the final resort, can serve no function. These are the objets a—the breasts, the faeces, the gaze, the voice. It is in this new term that resides the point that introduces the dialectic of the subject qua subject of the unconscious.

辨認出欲望驅力,使我們能夠斬釘截鐵地建構,我所謂的主體分裂的功能。我們能用什麼方法辨認出這個欲望驅力?我們所能辨認的是,我們曾找到某一種客體,但是在最後關頭,它卻無法發揮功用。因為發生在主體的無意識的東西,根本不是局限於快樂的領域,不是局限於一些善行及福祉的客體的意象。這些被統稱為「小客體」,如乳房、糞便、凝視、及聲音。人作為無意識的主體,展開的辯證法,就是從這些小客體開始。

Next time, I shall continue to develop the theme of the subject of the transference.

下一次,我將繼續講述「人作為移情的主體」這個命題。

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: