Furrows in the alethosphere 3

Furrows in the alethosphere 3
媒體氛圍的航跡

From The Other Side of Psychoanalysis
精神分析學的另類面貌

By Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉岡

This year I have given a large place to the text Hosea, with reference to what Freud extracts from it, according to Sellin. The greatest benefit of it is perhaps not, though it does exist on this level, calling the Oedipus complex into question, which I have called this “ residue of myth,” in psychoanalytic theory. Surely, if there were something necessary here to make present some ocean of mythical knowledge regulating the life of men—and how do we now whether it was harmonious or not? –the best reference could well be what Yahwch condemns, with what I called his ferocious ignorance, with the term” prostitution.”

今年,我花費相當多的時間探索何希亞的本文,依據謝林的說法,佛洛伊德的有些引文來自那裡。可是,它最大的利益可能並不是質疑伊底普斯情結,雖然這個質疑的層面確實存在那裡,因為在精神分析理論,那是我曾經稱之為「神話的殘餘」。的確,即使在此仍然有某種需要,來呈現那規範人類生活的浩瀚的神秘知識,我們又如何知道,那知識與現在和諧與否?猶如耶穌譴責眾人,自己內心充滿淫邪之念,卻還殘酷而無知地想置偶爾犯奸淫之過的婦女於死地。

This is enough of a foothold ( bias), to my mind, and surely a better one than the common reference to the fruits of ethnography. Ethnography conceals all kinds of confusion within itself, through adhering to what it gathers as if it were natural. And how is it gathered? It is gathered in writing, that is to say, detailed, extracted, distorted forever from the supposed terrain on which one is supposedly uncovering it.

依我之見,這種「殘酷而無知」是一個可以讓我們細加探索的平台,比一般種族偏見的「殘酷而無知」的平台來得更為合宜。種族偏見隱藏自己內部的各種混亂,透過我族中心匯聚自以為的正義與真理,把它們當著是天經地義。問題是,這種正義與真理是如何匯聚的?他們在書寫中被匯聚,換句話說,在他們所認為的平台,他們應該揭櫫正義與真理的平台,不斷地加以羅列、吸取、然後加以扭曲。

This is certainly not to say that mythical knowledge could inform us at greater length, or inform us better, about the essence of the sexual relation.

當然,這並不是說,神秘的知識能夠更詳細、更明確地告訴我們有關性關係的本質。

If psychoanalysis makes sex and, as a dependency, death present for us—even though here nothing is certain, except a general apprehension of a link between sexual difference and death, it’s by demonstrating, in a way that I wouldn’t call lively but merely articulated, that concerning the capture of this being—whatever it may be, which is to say that it is not even a being—in discourse the articulation in which the sexual relation is expressed only ever appears in a complex manner. This complex manner is one that cannot even be said to be mediated, even though there are medii-media, if you prefer—one of which is this real effect that I am calling surplus pleasure, which is the little a.

即使精神分析學實話實說,不耍花竅,使我們觀看到性,及跟性互相依存的死亡,我們只是攏統地理解到性的差異與死亡之間的關係,但又無法確定。我們只能顯示,關於這個生命的實存的掌握,是若存若亡,我們實在無以名之。就精神分析學而言,性關係的表達只能以迂迴曲折的方式。這個迂迴曲折的方式甚至也無法名之為中間的媒介,儘量實際上並不乏有媒介存在。它的真實效果,我現在稱之為剩餘歡爽,也就是小客體。

What does experience indicate to us,, in point of fact? That it is only when this little a is substituted for woman that man desires her. That, inversely, what a woman has to deal with insofar as we are able to speak about this, is this jouissance that is her own and is represented somewhere by a man’s omnipotence, which is precisely where man, when he speaks, when he speaks as master, discover that he is a failure.

事實上,精神分析經驗給我們什麼啟示?那就是,只有當這個小客體被用來替代女人時,男人才渴望它。反過來說,當我們對於這個問題能夠侃侃而談時,女人所必須處理的,是她自己的這個歡爽,而這個歡爽有時是以男人的無所不能來代表。就在這個地方,當男人正在言說,當男人作為一個主人在言說,他發現他自己心有餘而力不足。

This is where one has to start from in analytic experience—what could be called man, that is to say that the male as speaking being, disappears, vanishes through the very effect of the master’s discourse—spell it as you will—through being inscribed solely in castration, which, by this very fact, is properly to be defined as being deprived of woman—woman insofar as she would be realized in a suitably congruent signifier.

這就是我們精神分析經驗必須要開始介入的地方。我們能夠認為的男人,換句話說,作為言說存在主體的男人,此時消失無蹤,在主人的真理論述中,或在主人的真理迷霧中消失,因為男人在此是以被閹割的狀態被銘記,事實上,就是被剝奪女人的狀態被定義,因為女人的實現自我,也是要以旗鼓相當的意符。

Being deprived of woman—this, expressed in terms of the failure of discourse, is what castration means. It is indeed because this is not thinkable that the speaking order institutes this desire, constituted as impossible, as an intermediary and that makes the mother, insofar as she is prohibited, the privileged feminine object.

被閹割的意思就是,男人被剝奪女人,由於作為主人的真理論述力有不逮。確實就是因為這個不可思議的閹割,男人作為言說的存在主體,開始這個本質上是不可能的欲望,是需要有媒介的欲望。這使得母親成為一個具有特權的女性客體,因為她是被禁制的。

This is the wrapping established by the fundamental fact that in a mythical union between man and woman there is no possible place that could be defined as sexual.

這就是由基本的事實所建立的外表面貌。男人與女人之間的神秘的結合,沒有一個位置能夠被定義為是性關係。

This is, indeed, where what we grasp in the psychoanalytic discourse—the unifying One, the whole One—is not what is involved in identification. The pivotal identification, the major identification, is the unary trait. It is Being, marked one.

的確,這是我們精神分析學的真理論述所理解的內涵。人所參與的自我認同,並不是一個統一的主體,完整的主體。關鍵的自我們認同,主要的自我認同,是這個部份的小客體。那就是獨特的主體的生命實存,被標明為一個人的主體。

Prior to the promotion of any being, by virtue of a singular one, of what bears the mark from this moment forward, the effect of language arises, as does the first affect. This is what the formulas I wrote on the blackboard are saying.

憑藉作為一個獨特的主體,語言的效果隨之而來,如同第一個情懷隨之來。這個語言的效果與情懷,從出生的時刻開始,早於任何其它生命主體的出現。這就是我書寫在黑板上的公式的內涵。

Somewhere this something that the cogito only marks is isolated, also with the unary trait, that one can suppose the “ I am thinking” has in order to say, “ Therefore, I am.’ Here the effect of division is already marked by an “ I am” which elides the “ I am marked by the one”—for Descartes is, to be sure, inscribed in a scholastic tradition, which he wriggles out of acrobatically, which is not at all to be disdained as a means of escape.

在某一個地方,「我思故我在」所標示的部份被孤立起來,而且是用「我正在思想」所擁有的小客體的特徵孤立起來,為了要能夠表達「因此,我存在」。在此,分割的效果已經由「我存在」來表示,而「我存在」卻閃避了「我是一個獨特的主體」。的確,儘管笛卡爾如何千方百計要掙脫學術傳統,他是被銘記在這個學術傳統裡,這個事實絲毫不應該被藐視為是他的脫逃之計。

Moreover, it is as a function of this initial position of the “ I am” that the ‘ I am thinking” can be even so much as written. You will recall how I have been writing it for a long time now—“ I am thinking, ‘Therefore I am.’” This ‘ Therefore I am” is a thought.

而且,「我正在思想」之所以能夠被這樣書寫,正是它作為「我存在」初始的地位的功用。你們不妨回想一下,長久以來,我一直在書寫:「我正在思想,【因此我存在】」。這個【因此我存在】是一個思想。

It supports itself infinitely better by carrying its characteristic of knowledge, which does not go beyond the “ I am marked by the one,” by the singular, by the unique, by what?—by this effect which is, ‘ I am thinking.”

【因此我存在】這個命題能夠成立,是因為它具有知識的特徵。它並沒有超越「我是由一個獨特的主體來表示」,由這個獨特,由這個獨一無二,由這個「我正在思想」的這個結果來表示。

But here again, there is an error in the punctuation, which a long time ago I expressed this—the “ ergo,” which is nothing other than the “ ego” in play, should be put alongside the “ cogito.” The “ I am thinking, therefore, ‘I am’ ” gives the formula its real significance. The cause, the “ ergo,” is thought. The point of departure to take is the effect of what is involved in the simplest order, from which the language effect comes into play at the level of the emergence of the unary trait.

但是在這裡,標點符號有一點錯誤。很久以前,我曾這樣表達過:這個「因此ergo」,跟正在演示的「自我ego」,道道地地是異詞同音,應該跟「我思故我在」平行並列。「我正在思想,【因此我存在】」使上面的那道公式意義深遠。這個原因,這個「因此」,是一種思想。

To be sure, the unary trait is never alone. Therefore, the fact that it repeats itself—that it repeats itself in never being the same—is properly speaking the order itself, the order in question because language is present and already there, already efficacious.

的確,這個小客體的特徵從來就不是孤立存在。因此,小客體會一再重覆,它會一再重覆,卻又永遠不相同。適當地說,這就是小客體的條理,因為語言的奧妙存在這裡,已經在這裡,已經發揮功用。

雄伯譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
springherohsiung@gmail.com

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: