Archive for November, 2010

Anxiety 60 Jacques Lacan

November 30, 2010

Anxiety 60

Jacques Lacan

Anxiety 59 Jacques Lacan

November 30, 2010

Anxiety 59

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 8: Wednesday 16 January 1963

This little o, at the place where it is, at the level where it could be recognised if it were possible – because of course a little earlier I told you that to recognise oneself as object of one’s desire is always masochistic – if it were
possible, the masochist only does it on the stage. And you are going to see what happens when he can no longer remain there, on the stage. We are not always on the stage, even though the stage stretches very far, and even into the domain of our dreams.

這個小客體,處於它所在地地方,在它能夠被體認出的層次,假如可能的話。當然,因為稍早一點,我告訴過你們,要體認出自己,當著是自己欲望的客體,這總是一種受虐狂。即使這是可能,受虐狂只是在舞臺上才這樣做。你們將會看出,當他不再逗留在舞臺上時,會發生怎樣的事情。我們未必都是在舞臺上,即使這個舞臺延伸得很遠,即使舞臺延伸進入我們夢到領域。

And qua not on the stage and remaining on this side of it, and trying (11) to read in the Other what he returns from, we find nothing but the lack here at X (schema).

當我們不在舞臺上,而是逗留在舞臺的這一邊,設法從大它者身上閱讀到,他從哪里回轉,我們發現到僅僅就是這個「欠缺」,在這個未知的基模。

It is this liaison, coordination between the object and its
necessary lack there where the subject is constituted at the
locus of the Other, namely as far as possible, beyond even what can appear in the return of the repressed and constituting the Urverdranqunq, the irreducible of the incognito, because moreover we cannot say absolutely unknowable because we are talking about it, it is here that there is structured, that there is situated what, in our analysis of the transference, I produced before you by the term agalma.

就是這個聯繫,這個客體與其必須要的欠缺那裏之間的協凋。在那裏,生命的主體被形成,處於大它者的軌跡。換句話說,它盡可能超越被壓抑部份的回轉所能出現的東西,然後形成這個「原初的壓抑」,這個「無以名狀」的不可化簡。而且,我們無法說,它是絕對的不可知曉,因為我們正在談論它。就在這裏,在我們移情的精神分析學,我在你們面前,提出「無意識的珍寶」這個術語,它被建構,被定位在那裏。

It is in so far as this empty place is aimed at as such that
there is established the always more or less neglected – and for good reasons – dimension of transference. That this place as such can be circumscribed by something which is materialised in this image, a certain edge, a certain opening, a certain gap where the constitution of the specular image shows its limits, this is the elective locus of anxiety.

當這個空洞的地方目標朝著本身,這個總是被忽略的東西,就被建立在那裏。理由很充份,那就是移情的向度。這個地方的本身,能夠使用某件東西來定義。這個東西的具體表現就是這個意象,某種的邊緣,某種的開口,某種的鴻溝。在那裏,理想自我的魅影的意象的建構,顯示它的限度。這就是焦慮的選擇性的軌跡。

This phenomenon of edge, in what opens like this window
on privileged occasions, marks the illusory limit of this world of recognition, of the one that I call the stage. That it should be linked to this edge, to this framing, to this gap which is illustrated in this schema at least twice, in this edge here of the mirror and moreover in this little sign,<>, that this is the locus of anxiety, is what you ought always to retain as the signal of what is to be sought for in the middle.

這個邊緣的現象,在一些特權的場合,它像這個窗戶一般地展開。它標示著,對於世界的體認的幻見的限度,我稱之為舞臺的這個世界。它應該被連接到這個邊緣,到這個架構,到這個鴻溝。在這個基模裏,這個鴻溝至少被舉例說明兩次。在鏡子的這個邊緣,而且在這個小小的符號<>。這就是焦慮的軌跡,你們應該總是保留它當著是在中間應該被尋求的訊息。

The text of Freud to which I would ask you to refer, for it is a text that is always more stupefying to read because of this double aspect of weaknesses, of inadequacies which always present themselves to novices at the beginning as the first things to be picked out in the text of Freud and of the depth with which everything that he comes up against – reveals the degree to which Freud was here around this very field that we are trying to designate,

我要求你們參照佛洛伊德的文本,因為他的文本總是令人閱讀時,目瞪口呆。關於這個既微弱又不足的雙重面向,呈現在剛開始的新手面前,當著是首先要從佛洛伊德的這個文本,挑選出來的東西。佛洛伊德對抗的每一樣東西,其深度內涵都顯示,環繞著我們正在指明的這個領域,佛洛伊德自己沉迷不拔到怎樣的程度。

Of course, it is necessary first of all for you to be familiar with the text of Dora – can, for those who heard my discourse on the Symposium, recall this dimension always eluded when transference is involved, and of the other dimension in parenthesis, namely that transference is not simply something that reproduces a situation, an action, an attitude, an old (12) trauma, and repeats it;

當然,你們首先需要對於朵拉個案的文本耳熟能詳。對於那些聽過我論述柏拉圖的「饗宴」的人,你們可以回想一下這個向度:每當牽涉到移情的問題時,它總是避而不談。還有括弧裏的另外一個向度,換句話說,移情未必是某件複製一個情境,一個行動,一個態度,一個古老的創傷,然後重複它。

the fact is that there is always another coordinate, the one on which I put the accent in connection with the analytic intervention of Socrates, namely specifically in the case where I evoke a love present in the real, and that we can understand nothing about transference if we do not know that it is also the consequence of that love, that it is in connection with this present love – and analysts should remember it during analyses – of a love which is present in different ways, but that at least they should remember it, when it is there visible, that it is in function of what we could call this real love that there is established what is the central question of transference, namely the one the subject poses concerning the agalma, namely what he is lacking.

事實上,總是會有另外一個協凋。我強調這個協凋,當我提到蘇格拉底,充當精神分析的介入。換句話說,在這個明確的個案裏,我召喚一種愛情出現在真實界裏。對於這個移情,我們無法瞭解,假如我們不知道,它也是那種愛情的結果。關於這個出現的愛情,精神分析師應該記得它,在從事精神分析的時候。這個愛情以不同的方式出現,但是他們至少應該記得它,當它在那裏是顯而易見。就是在我們能夠稱之為真實的愛情這個功用,所謂移情牽涉到的核心問題,在那裏被建立。換句話說,生命的主體提出的這個問題,關於這個「無意識的珍寶」,換句話說,這是他正在欠缺的東西。

For it is with this lack that he loves. It is not for nothing that for years I have been repeating to you that love is to give what one does not have. This is even the principle of the castration complex: in order to have the phallus, in order to be able to make use of it, it is necessary precisely not to be it.

因為他所喜愛的就是這個欠缺。幾年來,我曾經跟你們一再重複說,愛就是給予自己所沒有的東西。我可不是空口說白話。這甚至就是閹割情結的原理。為了要擁有陽具,為了要能夠使用陽具,我們有需要本身不是陽具。

When one returns to the conditions where it appears that one is it – for one is it just as much for a man, there is no doubt
about it, and for a woman we will say again through what
incidence she is led to become it – well then it is always very dangerous.

當我們回到陽具似乎在那裏的這些情境,嗯,那總是危險萬分的狀況。(對於男人而言,陽具總是在他的身體那裏,這是無可置疑的;對於女人而言,容許我們再一次地說,透過種種巧合,女人被引導成為陽具。)

Let it suffice for me to ask you before leaving you to reread
attentively this text entirely devoted to the relationships
between Freud and his patient, this girl – I remind you – of whom he says that analysis makes there appear that it is essentially around an enigmatic disappointment concerning the birth in her family, the apparition in her household of a little child that she has been oriented towards homosexuality.

容我再要求你們,專心地閱讀這個文本,專注討論佛洛伊德跟他的病人,朵拉這個女人的關係。我提醒你們,關於這個女人,佛洛伊德說,精神分析學顯示出來:關於朵拉這個女人,她誕生在她的家庭,基本上是環繞著一個謎團一般的失望。在她的家庭裏,這是一個小孩的魅影,以致於,她的性別定向總是朝向同性戀。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Anxiety 59 Jacques Lacan

November 30, 2010

Anxiety 59

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 8: Wednesday 16 January 1963

This is to cheapen the difficulty and, to go straight to the point which makes you sense it, I would say that it is not for any other reason than to make you sense it, that there is value in the (9) central myth which allowed psychoanalysis to take off, namely the Oedipus myth.

這是為了減少困難,直接到達使你們感覺到它的這一點。我不妨說,沒有別的理由,除了就是要讓你們感覺到它。在這個中央的神話裏,有個價值讓精神分析學得以開展,那就是伊底普斯的神話。

The Oedipus myth means nothing else, if not that, at the origin,
desire, the desire of the father and the law are one and the same thing, and that the relationship between the law and desire is so close that nothing but the function of the law traces the path of desire, that desire, qua desire of the mother, for the mother, is identical to the function of the law. It is in so far as the law prohibits her that it imposes desiring her: for after all the mother is not in herself the most desirable object.

伊底普斯的神話所指的意義,不是別的,難道不就是,在起源處有欲望,父親的欲望跟法則,是二者合一的事情?處於法則跟欲望之間的關係,是如此的靠近,以致於,只有法則的功用能追蹤到欲望的途徑,那個欲望,作為母親的欲望。對於母親的欲望。那個欲望相當等於是法則的功用。就在法則禁止她的時刻,法則賦加了對她的欲望:畢竟,母親本身並不是最令人欲望的東西。

If everything is organised around this desire for the mother, if it is starting from there that it is posed that the woman one should prefer – for this is what is in question – should be other than the mother, what does that mean, if not that a commandment is imposed, is introduced into the very structure of desire; that in a word one desires according to the commandment. What does the whole myth of Oedipus mean, if not that the desire of the father is what has made the law.

假如一切的組織都繞著對於母親的欲望,假如從那裏,提出的問題是,我們應該喜愛的女人,應該是母親除外的女人,(這是受到質疑的地方),那是什麼意思?難道不就是,一個戒律被賦加,被介紹到欲望的這個結構?總之,我們是依照戒律去產生欲望。伊底普斯的整個神話的意義,難道不就是:父親的欲望是法則被創造的原因?

From this perspective masochism takes on the value and function of appearing and clearly appearing – it is its only value for the masochist – when desire and the law are found together; for what the masochist tries to make appear – and I add, on his little stage, for one must never forget this dimension – is something where the desire of the Other lays down the law.

從這個觀點來看,受虐狂具有的這個價值跟功用是,當欲望跟法則被發現在一起時,大它者的欲望是奠定法則,這個東西出現。(對於受虐狂而言,這是它唯一的價值。)受虐狂設法使它出現,容我補充說,在他的小小的舞臺上,我們一定不要忘記這個向度。

We see immediately one of its effects: it is that the masochist
himself appears in this function that I would call lopsided
(dejet) with respect to this object of ours, the o of which we speak under the appearance of waste (dejete), of what is thrown to the dogs, on the rubbish heap, in the dustbin, to the rejection of the common object, for want of being able to put it elsewhere.

我們立刻看到它的影響之一。受虐狂本身出現在這個功用,我稱之為「傾向一邊」的功用,關於我們的這個客體,我們提到這個客體,在廢棄物的外表下,被丟棄給狗吃的渣滓,在垃圾堆裏,在廢物箱裏。這個共同客體的被拒絕,因為在別的地方,缺乏讓它被使用的空間。

It is one of the aspects in which there can appear the o as it shows itself in perversion. And this does not exhaust in any way what we can only circumscribe by going around it, namely the function of o. But since I have taken this perspective of masochism, since I have introduced it, we must give ourselves other points of reference to situate this function of o.

這也就是它的影響之一,當這個客體顯現它自己在變態狂身上,它也會出現。無論如何,這並沒有涵蓋一切,我們只能拐彎抹角予以描述的東西,也就是客體的功用。但是既然我已經採納受虐狂的這個觀點,既然我已經介紹它,我們就必須提供我們自己其他的指稱點,為了要定位客體的這個功用,

You see one of them at the level of masochism. I remind you that one must first take for its function of gross correlation, that the central effect of this identity which conjoins the desire of the (10) father and the law, is the castration complex in so far as when the law is born by this moulting, this mysterious mutation of the desire of the father after he had been killed, the consequence is, just as much in the history of analytic thought as in everything that we can conceive of as the most certain liaison, is in any case the castration complex.

你們看到其中一樣,在受虐狂的層次。我提醒你們,你們首先必須將它當作是它的總體相互關係的功用:連接父親的欲望跟法則的這個認同,它的中央的影響是,閹割情結。當法則是依據這個蛻變所誕生,父親的欲望的這個神秘的切除,在他被殺死之後,這個結果是,在精神分析學思想的歷史,如同在每一樣我們能夠構想當著是最確定的聯繫,不論哪一種情況,都是閹割情結。

This is why you have already seen appearing in my schemas the
notation (-) at the place where o is missing.

這就是為什麼你們已經看到,在我的基模,這個(-SD) 的標記的出現。在那裏,客體消失不見。

Therefore, a first point today: I spoke to you about the object
as cause of desire. Second point, I told you: to recognise
oneself as the object of one’s desire, is always masochistic; I pointed out to you in this connection what was taking shape for us as a presentation – in a certain incidence of the super-ego, I indicated to you a particularity that is in some way depreciated – of what is happening at the place of this object o in the form of (-$<>D).

因此,今天的第一點是:我跟你們談論到這個客體,當著是欲望的原因。第二點,我告訴你們,體認出自己,充當自己欲望的客體,總是一種受虐狂。我跟你們指出,關於這一點,對於我們而言,正在成形的東西,作為一種呈現。作為某種因緣際會的超我,我跟你們指出一個特別的地方,它受到某種方式的貶抑。就是發生在這個客體,以受到禁制的生命主體,透過欲望的辯證法的形式這個地方。

We come to our third point, the one which concerns precisely this possibility of the manifestations of the object o as lack.

我們來到第三點。這一點確實關係到,是否有可能證明,這個客體是「欠缺」。

It is structural to it. And it is in order to make it conceivable that this schema, this image designed to make it familiar to you has been presentified and recalled to you for some time past.

這是客體的結構。為了要讓它能夠被構想,這個基模,這個被設計來讓你們覺得熟悉的這個意象,己經給予具體呈現,讓你們回想起過去的某段時間。

The object o at the level of our analytic subject, of the source
of what subsists as body which in part, for us hides from us as I might say its own will, this object o is this rock of which Freud speaks, this final irreducible reserve of libido whose contours it is so pathetic to see him literally punctuating in these texts every time that he encounters it.

這個客體,處於我們精神分析的生命主體的層次,是維持作為身體的來源。對於我們而言,它有一些部分隱藏,不讓我們看見。容我這樣說,作為它自己的意志,這個客體是佛洛伊德談論的這個磐石,這個最後無法被化簡的力比多的儲備區。它的輪廓是如此的令人哀憐,每當佛洛伊德邂逅到它,在他的這些文本中實際描繪的景象。

I will not end my lecture today without telling you where you should go to renew this conviction.

今天我的演講結束之前,我一定要告訴你們,你們應該去哪里,重新振興這個信念。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Anxiety 58 Jacques Lacan

November 30, 2010

Anxiety 58

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 8: Wednesday 16 January 1963

(7) Moreover, if you evoke what is involved in the figure of
Sade, you will see then that it is not by chance if, what can be extracted from it, what remains of it, through a sort of
transubstantiation through the ages, with the imaginary
elaboration of his figure throughout the generations, is a form – Man Ray could do no better when he tried to construct his imaginary portrait – precisely a petrified form.

而且,假如你們想像虐待狂薩德形象所牽涉到的,你們將會看出,那不是偶然發生。從這個形象所抽取出來,裏面所剩餘的,幾世紀來已經誤傳變質,幾個世代下來,我們對於他的形象已經滲入幻想的建構。他確實已經成為一種定型的形象。這一點,滿瑞表達得最為透徹,當他設法建構他的想像種的肖像。

Quite different is, as you know, the position of the masochist for whom this incarnation of himself as object is the declared goal, whether he turns himself into a dog under the table or a piece of merchandise, an item that is treated in a contract by giving it over, by selling it as one among other objects that are on the market, in short, his identification with this other object which I called the common object, the object of exchange, this is the route, this is the path on which he seeks precisely what is impossible, which is to grasp himself for what he is, in so far as like all of us he is an o. .

眾所周知,受虐狂的立場則是完全不同,他自己的這個具體化身,充當客體,是某個人所宣稱的目標,無論他將自己轉變成桌子底下的一條狗,或是一件傢具,一份契約上的一項東西,可以將它轉移,將它販賣,當著是市場的一件物品之一。總之,他對於這個其他客體的認同,我稱之為共同客體,交換的客體。這就是這條路線,這就是這條途徑,他確實在尋求不可能界。這個不可能界將會掌握他自己,因為他生命的本質。就像我們大家一樣,他是一個小客體。

To know why he is so interested by this recognition, which all the same remains impossible, is of course what many particular conditions of his analysis could reveal. But before even being able to understand these particular conditions, there are certain conjunctions which must be properly established here and which are the most structural ones. This is what we are going to try to do now.

要知道為什麼他如此感到興趣,對於這個體認,雖然這個體認仍舊是不可能的。當然,這是對於他的精神分析的許多特別的情況所能夠顯露出來。但是即使在我們能夠瞭解這些特別的情況之前,就有某些的連接,在此必須要適當地建立。這些連接是最結構性的連接。這就是我們現在將要設法做的。

You should clearly understand that I have not said, without
elaboration, that the masochist attains his identification with the object. As for the sadist this identification only appears on the stage. Only, even on this stage, the sadist does not see himself, he only sees the remainder. There is also something that the masochist does not see – we will see what perhaps a little later – but this allows me to introduce right away some formulae the first of which is the following: that to recognize oneself as the object of one’s desire, in the sense that I am articulating it today, is always masochistic.

你們應該很清楚地瞭解到,我並非完全不加思索就說出:受虐狂獲得他對於這個客體的認同。至於虐待狂,這個認同只是出現在舞臺上。只是,即使在這個舞臺上,虐待狂並沒有看到他自己,他只是看到殘餘物。也還有某件東西,受虐狂沒有看見的,(我們稍後或許會看出)。但是這個使我們能夠立刻介紹有些的公式。其中第一個公式,就是充當某個人欲望的客體。以我今天所表達的意義來說,那總是一種受虐狂。

This formula has the interest of making the difficulty tangible for you, because it is all too convenient to use our little Punch and to say that if there is masochism, it is because the super-ego is very wicked, for example. We know of course that within masochism we make all the necessary distinctions: erogenous masochism, feminine masochism, moral masochism.

這個公式會引起你們的興趣,在於將這個困難具體化。因為要將它充當我們的木偶表演,實在是輕而易舉,然後說,假如有受虐狂,那是因為超我是很邪惡,譬如這樣說。當然我們知道,在受虐狂裏,我們從事一切必須要的區別:色情的受虐狂,女性的受虐狂,道德的受虐狂。

But as the simple enunciation of this classification has pretty much the same effect as what I would say if I were to say: “There is this glass, there is the Christian faith, and there is the collapse of (8) Wall Street”. This should all the same leave us a little dissatisfied.

但是這個分類作為簡單的表明,擁有相同的效果,跟我想要說的,假如我這樣說:這裏有這個玻璃杯,有基督教的信仰,有華爾街的崩盤。這樣的陳述應該會使我們大家仍然有一點不滿意。

If the term masochism can have a meaning, it would be well to find a more unitary formula for it and if we were to
say that the super-ego is the cause of masochism, we would not be abandoning too much this satisfying intuition, except for the fact that, since we have said before that the object is the cause of desire, we would see that the super-ego shares, at least that it shares the function of this object qua cause, as I have introduced it today in order to make you sense how true it is.

假如這「受虐狂」的術語有一個意義,假如我們能替它找出一個更加一貫的公式,那就太好了。假如我們想要說,超我就是受虐狂的原因,對於這個令人滿意的直覺,我們將不會放棄太多。除了這個事實:因為我們以前已經說過,這個客體就是欲望的客體。我們將會看出,超我分享,至少它會分享這個客體充當原因的功用。今天我已經介紹過它,為了讓你們感覺到它有多麼的真實。

I could include it in the catalogue, in the series of these objects as we will have to deploy them before you, by illustrating this place with all the contents, if you wish, that it can have and which are numerable. If I did not do it at the beginning, it was so that you would not lose your heads, by seeing them as contents, and think that they are the same thing that you always discover about analysis. For it is not true. If you think you know the function of the maternal breast, or that of the turd, you know well how much obscurity remains in your minds about the phallus, and when it is the object which comes immediately after that is concerned. I will give it to you all the same, as a way of giving your curiosity something to feed on, namely the eye as such, about it you know nothing at all. This is why it should only be approached with prudence, and for the best of reasons.

我能夠包括它在這個目錄裏,在這一連串的客體裏,我們必須運用它們,在你們面前。我會舉例說明這個地方,以及它能夠有的所有的內容,那是屈指可數。假如我沒有從一開始就這樣做,那是為了不要讓你們感到混淆,把它當作是內容,然後就認為,它們跟你們在精神分析學發現的東西,都是大同小異。其實不然。假如你們認為你們知道母親的乳房的功用,或是糞便的功用,你們心知肚明,關於陽具,在你們心目中該有多麼齷齪!雖然陽具是我們開始一關心就立刻出現的客體,我仍然將它給予你們,充當可以滿足你們好奇心的東西。換句話說,充當眼睛的本身。關於它,你們根本就一無所知。這就是為什麼,我們探討它時,應該小心翼翼,理由很多。

This is the object involved since, when all is said and done, it is the object without which there is no anxiety, it is because it is a dangerous object. Let us be prudent therefore since I lack, that is to say in the immediate, the opportunity of making appear in what sense I said it – this caught the ear of one of my listeners – I said, two lectures ago, that if desire and the law were the same thing, it is in so far and in this sense that desire and the law have a common object.

這就是所牽涉到的客體,當一切都說都做了,它是這個客體,焦慮一定會牽涉到的客體。那是因為它是一個危險的客體。因此,讓我們小心謹慎,因為我欠缺這個機會,換句話說,當下的機會,來呈現我所要說的意義。(我的聽眾當中,曾經有一位心領神會),在前兩次的演講,當我說:假如欲望跟法則是同一件事情,從這個意義來說,欲望跟法則會有一個共同的客體。

It is not enough then in this case to give oneself the
consolation that they are, with respect to one another, like the two sides of the wall, or like the front and the back.

從這個意義來說,光是讓你們感到欣慰是不足夠的。欲望跟法則,彼此就像一道牆的兩邊,或是像是前面跟後面。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Anxiety 57 Jacques Lacan

November 29, 2010

Anxiety 57

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 8: Wednesday 16 January 1963

Everything that follows in our discourse will not stop
(5) illustrating it further, but already I want you to understand properly what is involved, where our research will lead us: the fact is that it is at the very locus where your mental habits indicate that you should seek for the subject, this something which despite you is outlined as such as subject at the place where for example Freud indicates the source of the tendency, indeed there where there is something which, in discourse, you articulate as being you, there where you say: “I”, it is there properly speaking that at the level of the unconscious there is situated o.

我們的真理論述後面所要講的一切,將會繼續舉例說明,但是我已經要你們瞭解,適當來說,我們的研究引導我們前往,所會牽涉到的東西。事實上,就在這個軌跡,你們的精神習慣指示著,你們應該尋找這個生命的主體,這個某件東西。你們儘管不甚暸然,這個東西的輪廓,本身已經被描繪充當生命的主體,就在這個地方,佛洛伊德指示是這個傾向的來源。的確,在這個地方,有某件東西,在論述裏,你們表達它當著是實存的你。在那個地方,你們說「我」。適當來說,這個地方處於無意識位置所在的地方。

At this level, you are o, the object, and everyone knows that
this is what is intolerable and not only to discourse itself,
which after all betrays it. I am going to illustrate it right
away by a remark destined to introduce some displacement, some
disturbance even, as regards the ruts in which you are used to leaving the functions described as sadism and masochism as if all that was involved there was the register of a sort of immanent aggression and its reversibility.

在這個層次,你們是客體,這個客體。眾所周知,這就是最不能被容忍的地方,不但真理論述的本身,因為追根到底,它會被背叛。我將立刻要舉例說明它,我的談論一定會介紹某種的替代,甚至是某種的困擾,關於你們習以為常的慣例,諸如被描述為虐待狂及受虐狂的功用。好像一切所牽涉到的東西,都會有某種的內在的侵犯及其倒轉。

It is precisely in the measure that one has to enter into their
subjective structure that traits of difference are going to
appear, the essential being the one that I am going to designate
now.

的確,隨著我們必須進入他們的主觀性的結構,差異的特徵將會出現,基本的這個特徵,我現在就要介紹。

If sadism can be imaged, in a form which is only an
abbreviated schema of the same distinctions that the graph
organises, in a formula with four vertices of the kind that I am designating here, we have here the side of 0, of the Other, and here that of let us say, of the subject S, of this still
unconstituted I of this subject precisely to be questioned, to be revised within our experience, of which we only know that it cannot, in any case, coincide with the traditional
formula of the subject, namely the degree of exhaustion there can be in every relationship with the object.

假如虐待狂能夠被意象化,只是用圖表組織的相同的區別,作為一個簡縮的基模,用一個擁有四個頂端的公式。我現在在此指明,我們擁有大它者的這一邊,在此容我們這樣說,生命的主體,這個依舊尚未被建構成形的「我」,這個生命的主體應該受到質疑,應該受到訂正,在我們的精神分析經驗裏。據我們所知,精神分析經驗,無論如何,無法等同於傳統對於生命主體的公式。換句話說,在那裏所涵蓋的程度,會擴展到跟這個客體的各種關係。

If there is something there called sadistic desire, with all the enigma it involves, it is only articulatable, it is only
formulatable in so far as this schize, this dissociation, that it aims essentially at introducing in the other, by imposing on him, up to a certain limit, that which cannot be tolerated, at the exactly adequate limit where there manifests itself, where there appears in the other this division, this gap there is between his (6) existence as subject and what he undergoes, what he can suffer in his body.

假如有某件東西被稱之為虐待狂的欲望,以及它所牽涉到的謎團,它只能夠被表達,它只能夠被說明,從這個分裂,這個分開。它是的目標,基本上是朝向大它者那裏,以逼迫它到達某個程度,介紹所無法容忍的東西,就在確實是適當的限度。在那裏,這個分裂會證明它自己,會出現在大它者那裏。這個鴻溝處於他運作充當生命的主體,以及他所經歷,他在自己身體所承受的痛苦之間。

And to such a degree is it this distinction, this division, this gap as essential that is involved and a matter of questioning, that in fact it is not so much the suffering of the other that is sought in the sadistic intention, as his anxiety – precisely here I articulate, I designate, I note this little sign, f 0, which in the first formulae that I believe in my second lecture of this year, I introduced concerning anxiety, I taught you to read by the term not 0 , 1 told you, but zero – the anxiety of the other, his essential existence as subject with respect to this anxiety, this is what the sadistic desire wants to make vibrate.

牽涉到的這個區隔,這個分開,這個鴻溝,是如此的重要,以致於事實上,重要的不是大它者的痛苦,在虐待狂的意圖中所被尋求的,而是他的焦慮。確實在這裏,我表達,我指明,我注意到「f 0」這個小小的符號。在第一個公式,我相信在今年我的第二次演講當中,我介紹關於焦慮。我教導你們如何閱讀這個術語,我告訴你們,這不是字母的O,而是數目的零。大它者的焦慮,他的基本的存在充當生命的主體,關於這個焦慮。這就是虐待狂的欲望,想要讓它振動的地方。

And it is for this reason that, in one of my past seminars, I did not hesitate to relate its structure as properly homologous to what Kant articulated as a condition for the exercise of pure practical reason, of a moral will properly speaking, and, in a word, to situate there the only point where there can be manifested a relationship with a pure moral good.

因為這個理由,在我過去的研討會中,我毫不猶豫地描述它的結構,適當來說,相當等於是康得所表達,作為純粹實踐理性的運用的條件。適當來說,就是一個道德的意志。總之,在那裏要定位這個唯一點,跟純粹道德善行的關係,能夠被證明出來。

I apologise for the briefness of this reminder. Those who were
present at this rapprochement will remember it; those who were
not able to attend will see, I think, appearing in the not too distant future what I took up of it again in a preface to Philosophy in the boudoir which was precisely the text around which I had organised this comparison.

我很抱歉,這個溫故知新的部份如此簡短。那些曾經出席這個研討會的人,都會記得它。那些不能夠出席的人,將會看出,在不會太久的未來,我認為我以前從事的東西會再出現。當時我是替日常生活哲學作一個序言。這個哲學確實是這個文本,我曾經以它為主題,建構這個比較。

What is important today and the only thing I want to add another
touch to, is that what characterises the sadistic desire is
properly that he does not know that in the accomplishment of his act, of his ritual – because it involves properly speaking this type of human action in which we find all the structures of ritual – what he does not know, is what he is looking for, and what he is looking for, is properly speaking to realise himself, to make himself appear, to whom – since, in any case, this revelation can only remain obscure to himself – to make himself appear as pure object, black fetish.

今天重要的是,唯一我想要填加的另外一層意義,就是這個虐待狂的欲望的特徵,確實就是,他並不知道,在執行他的行動的時刻,在他執行虐待儀式的時刻,他所不知道的是,他正在尋找什麼?(適當來說,因為這牽涉到這種人類的行動,在行動中,我發現到儀式的結構)。適當來說,他所正在尋找的,就是要實現他自己,要使他自己出現。使他自己出現,充當純粹的客體,黑暗的物神。(無論如何,這個啟明,他自己始終渾然不覺。)

This is how there can be resumed, in its final term, the manifestation of sadistic desire, in so far as the one who is its agent goes towards such a realisation.

這就是在它最後的術語,虐待狂的欲望的證明,有時會再出現。作為它的代理者的這個人,最終會恍然大悟。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Anxiety 56 Jacques Lacan

November 29, 2010

Anxiety 56

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 8: Wednesday 16 January 1963

Moreover this function of the object, in the novel structural
topology that it requires, is quite tangible in Freud’s
formulations, and specifically in those concerning the drive.
Let it suffice for me to – if you want to check it against a text, I would refer you to the XXXIInd lecture from the
Introduction to psychoanalysis, which can be found in what is called the new series of Vorlesungen, the one I quoted the last time – it is clear that the distinction between Ziel, the goal of the drive and the Objekt is something quite different to what you first think, that this goal and this object should be at the same place.

而且,這個客體的功用,它所要求的新奇的結構拓樸圖形,在佛洛伊德的說明,是相當具體的,特別是在有關欲望驅力的那些說明。我不妨這樣說,假如你們想要參照一個文本,我推薦你們看「精神分析導論」第三十二篇演講。在那新的演講系列,你們能夠找到我上一次引述的那篇。顯而易見的,在欲望驅力的目標跟客體之間的區別,是某件完全不同於你們起初所認為的:這個目標跟這個客體應該在相同的位置。

And the statements of Freud that you will find in this place, in the lecture that I am designating for you, employ very striking terms, the first of which is the term eingeschoben:
the object slides in it, goes somewhere – it is the same word
which is used for the Verschiebung which designates displacement – the object in its essential function as the something which slips away is here highlighted as such, at the level of understanding which is properly our own.

你們在這個地方,將可以找到佛洛伊德的陳述,在我跟你們指明的這篇演講中。這些陳述使用非常生動的術語,其中第一個就是「溜滑」的術語,客體在裏面溜滑,去到某個地方。這個相同的字,被用來充當「替代」,指明是一種替代。這個客體的基本功用,充當某件溜走的東西,在此本身被強調,適當來說是在我們所能瞭解的層次。

On the other hand, there is, at this level the explicit
opposition between two terms äusseres, external, outside, and
inneres, inside. It is specified that the object is no doubt to be situated äusseres, on the outside, and on the other hand that the satisfaction of the tendency is only found to be accomplished in so far as it connects up with something which is to be considered in the inneres, the inside of the body, it is there that it finds its Befriedigung, its satisfaction.

在另一方面,在這個層次,有「外面」跟「裏面」兩個術語的明確的對立。無可置疑的,這個客體被指明是定位在外面。在另一方面,我們發現,這個傾向的滿足,只有在跟某件被認為是在裏面,身體的裏面,它才能夠被完成、就在身體裏面那裏,它找到它的滿足。

This also tells you that what I introduced for you as a topological function allows us to formulate in a clear fashion that what has to be introduced here to resolve this impasse, this riddle, is the notion of an outside before a certain intériorisation, of the outside which is situated here, o, before the subject at the locus of the Other, grasps himself in x in this specular form which introduces for him the distinction between the me and the (4) not-me.

這也告訴你們,我所跟你們介紹,充當一種拓樸圖形的功用,使我們能夠清楚地說明,為了解決這個僵局,這個謎團,在此所必須要被介紹的是,在某種的「內在化」之前的一種「外面」的觀念,被定位在客體這裏的「外面」。 在處於大它者的軌跡的生命的主體之前,這個客體理解他自己,以這個理想自我的魅影的形式的某個未知點。這個形式替他介紹這個處於這個「我」跟「非我」的區別。

It is to this outside, to this locus of the object before any
intériorisation, that there belongs – if you try to take up again the notion of cause – that this notion of cause, I am saying, belongs.

原因的觀念,(假如設法再一次從事原因的觀念),我是說,原因的觀念就是屬於這個外面,這個在任何內在化之前的客體的軌跡。

I am going to illustrate it immediately in the simplest fashion
to make you hear what I am saying; because moreover I will
abstain today from doing any metaphysics.

我將立刻以最簡單的方式,舉例說明它,為了使你們聽到我正在說的。而且,今天我將節制,不談任何的形上學。

In order to image it, it is not by chance that I will make use of the fetish as such, where there is unveiled this dimension of the object as cause of desire. Because it is not the slipper, or the breast, nor whatever it may be in which you incarnate the fetish that is desired; but the fetish as cause of desire which hooks onto whatever it can, onto someone who is not absolutely necessarily the one who is wearing the slipper; the slipper can be in her surroundings; it is not even necessary that she should have the breast: the breast can be in the head.

為了給予它具體意象,我刻意使用這個物質客體本身。在那裏,這個客體的向度被揭露,作為欲望的原因。因為你將你欲望的物體,具體表現的並不是拖鞋,或乳房,也不是任何其他東西。而是將物體作為欲望的原因,它會跟任何東西掛鈎,會跟某一位未必一定要穿著拖鞋的人掛鈎。拖鞋有時候會在她的環境裏,甚至她未必一定要有乳房;乳房有時是長在頭上。

But what everyone knows, is that, for the fetishist, it is necessary that the fetisn should be there, that it is the condition upon which desire sustains itself.

但是眾所周知,對於戀物癖者,物體在那裏是需要的,欲望維持它自己,就是根據這個條件。

And I would indicate here, in passing, this term, little used I believe in German and that the vague translations that we have in in French, allow to escape completely; it is, when anxiety is involved, the relationship that Freud indicates with Libidoaushalt. We are dealing here with a term which is between Aushaltung which would indicate something of the order of interruption, of breaking and Inhalt which is the content.

我在此順便指明,這個術語,我相信在德文很少被使用。我們在法文所擁有的模糊的翻譯,意義完全走失掉。當焦慮被牽涉到,佛洛伊德指明是跟「生命力比多」的關係。我們在此處理一個術語,介於「條理」跟「內涵」之間,前者指明是某件干擾或是中斷的秩序,後者則是內容。

It is neither one thing nor the other: it is the support of the libido.

既不是這件東西,或是另一件東西。而是對於生命力比多的支持。

In a word, this relationship to the object that I am speaking
about to you today, is here directed, indicated in a fashion
which allows a synthesis to be made between the signal function
of anxiety and its relationship all the same to something that we can call an interruption in the support of the libido.

總之,我今天要跟你們談論的,就是這種跟客體的關係。它在此被引導,被指明的方式,容許我們做一個綜合,對於焦慮的訊號的功用,跟它的關係,與某件我們稱之為生命力比多的支持的中斷,有關係。

We are going to come back to it because this is one of the points that I intend to advance before you today. Assuming that I have made myself adequately understood by this reference to the fetish, about the maximal difference that there is between two possible perspectives concerning the object as object of desire, two specifications of what is involved, when I put o first in an essential precession, I will illustrate it a little further.

我們將會回到它,因為這是我今天打算跟你們表達的重點之一。假定我談論到這個戀物癖,已經讓我自己充份地被瞭解,關於這個最大的差異,在這兩個可能的觀點之間。有關客體作為欲望的客體,會牽涉到兩個明確的細節,當我將小客體首先擺放在優先的秩序,容我再進一步舉例說明。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Anxiety 55 Jacques Lacan

November 28, 2010

Anxiety 55

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 8: Wednesday 16 January 1963

If the o which we are dealing with here was all the same
introduced a long time ago and along the path which brings it to you, was therefore announced elsewhere, it was announced in the formula of the phantasy $ <> o, desire of o, this is the formula of the phantasy qua support for desire.

假如我們在此處理的這個客體,在很久以前就已經被介紹,在我引導你們的這條研究途徑,它因此在別的地方,就已經被宣佈過。它被宣佈,以幻見這個公式:
生命的主體對於欲望客體的辯證法。這就是幻見的公式,作為對於欲望的支持

My first point will be then to recall, to articulate, to add one more specification certainly for those who have heard me, one not impossible for them to master by themselves, even though it does not seem superfluous to me to underline it today.

我首先要做的,是提醒,表達,及增添另外一個明確的東西,給那些曾經聽過我演講的人。這個明確的東西,他們雖然光憑他們自己,要領悟出來,也不是不可能。不過,我還是不覺得我今天強調它是多餘的。

As a first point – I hope to reach point four – and to specify this function of the object in so far as we define it analytically as object of desire, the mirage coming from a perspective that one could call subjectivist, I mean the one which in the constitution of our experience puts the whole accent on the structure of the subject, this line of elaboration that the modern philosophical tradition brought to its most extreme point, let us say, around Husserl, by separating out the function of intentionality, is one
that makes us the captives of a misunderstanding, concerning what can be called the object of desire. The object of desire cannot be conceived of in a fashion which teaches us that there is no noeme, no thinking about something’which is not turned towards something, the only point around which idealism can turn in its path towards the Real.

作為一個起始點,(我希望我能講到第四點),為了指明這個客體的功用,我們從精神分析的立場,給它定義為欲望的客體。這個海市蜃樓的幻景來自一個觀點,我們可以稱之為「主觀主義者」。我的意思是,當我們在建構我們的生活經驗時,我們整個的強調點,都放置在生命主體的結構上。這種精心建構的技倆,現代哲學的傳統將它運用得最為淋漓盡致。它環繞著現象學家胡塞爾,區隔開一个意义的「意圖性」的功用。容我們這樣說,這種現象學會使我們成為一種誤解的奴隸,關於所謂的欲望的客體。欲望的客體不能夠用這種方式來構想,我們不可能思考有關某件東西,它不朝向某件東西。理想主義在它朝向真實界的途徑,都要環繞這個唯一的點、

(2) Is this how things are as regards desire? For this level of our listening which exists in everyone and which has need of intuition, I would say: “Is the object of desire out in front?

這就是關於欲望的事情本質嗎?存在於每一個人的我們傾聽的這個層次,它擁有直覺得需要,容我這樣說:「欲望的客體會暴露在前面嗎?」

This is the mirage that is involved and which has sterilised
everything that in analysis intended to advance in the direction described as object relations. It is in order to rectify it that I have already travelled along many paths.

這就是這個海市蜃樓的幻景所牽涉到,而且使得一切東西都貧瘠化。在精神分析裏,這一切東西都被用來提升朝向被描述為的「客體關係」。為了要矯正它,我已經沿著許多研究途徑,遠途跋涉。

It is a new way of accentuating this rectification that I am going to put forward to you now.

這是一種新的方式,強調我現在正在跟你們提出的這個矯正。

I will not make it as developed as it no doubt should be,
reserving, I hope, this formulation for a work which will reach
you along a different path.

我將按照它所應該被發展的方式,使它儘量被發展。我希望,我能保留這個說明,給沿著另外一條途徑,到達你們的作品。

I think that for most of you listening it will be enough to hear the gross formulae with which I believe I can content myself to emphasise today this point which I have just introduced.

我認為,對於你們大部份傾聽的人而言,能夠聽到大略的公式,應該就夠了。我相信,我今天能夠強調我剛剛介紹的這一點,我就心滿意足。

You know how, in the progress of epistemology, the isolation of the notion of cause has produced considerable difficulties.

你們知道,在認識論的進展過程,將原因這個觀念孤立出來,曾經產生相當多的困難。

It is not without a series of reductions which end up by leading it to the most tenuous and the most equivocal function that the notion of cause was able to be maintained in the development of what in the largest sense we could call our physics.

在我們廣義所謂的物理學的發展過程,原因的觀念能夠維持它微弱而模棱兩可的功用,不是沒有經過一連串的化簡的過程。

It is clear on the other hand that whatever reduction one submits it to, what one might call the mental function of this notion cannot be eliminated, reduced to a sort of metaphysical shadow.

在另一方面,顯而易見的,無論我們將它承受怎樣的化簡,我們所謂的這個觀念的精神層面的功用,就是無法被減少,被化簡成為一種形上學的陰影。

We clearly sense that there is something, which it is too little
to say that is a recourse to intuition, which makes it subsist,
which remains around this function of cause, and I claim that it is starting from the re-examination that we can make of it, starting from analytic experience, that the whole Critique of pure reason, brought up to date with our science, could
re-establish a correct status of cause.

我們很清楚地感覺到,有某件東西,因為份量太少,我們無法說它訴諸於直覺。直覺可以使它存在。但是會始終繞著這個原因的功用。我宣稱,從這個重新檢查開始,我們能夠解釋它。從精神分析經驗開始,純粹理性的整個的批判,隨著科學的進步成為一種顯學。它替原因重新建立一個正確的地位。

I scarcely dare to say to introduce it – for after all what I am going to formulate is here only a discourse event and scarcely anchored on this dialectic – I would say then, to fix our aims, what I intend to make you understand. The object, the object o, this object which is not to be situated in anything whatsoever which is analogous to the intentionality of an noeme, which is not in the intentionality of desire, this object ought to be conceived by us as the cause of desire, and, to take up my (3) metaphor of a little while ago, the object is behind desire.

我幾乎不敢說是要介紹它,(畢竟,我所要說明的是,在此它只是一個真理論述的事件,幾乎不會停駐在這個辯證法上)。我不妨這樣說,為了要確認我們的目標,這是我打算要讓你們明暸的。這個客體,這個客體不應該被定位在任何類同一個意義的「意圖性」的東西。它並不是欲望的意圖性,我們應該構想這個客體,當著是欲望的原因。這個客體躲在欲望的後面,用不久以前我用來當著比喻的方式來說。

It is from this object o that there arises this dimension whose
omission, whose elision, whose avoidance in the theory of the
subject constituted the inadequacy up to the present of this
whole coordination whose centre manifests itself as a theory of knowledge, gnoseology.

從這個欲望的客體,這個向度就出現。在生命主體的理論,這個向度的遺漏,它的省略,它的避免,構成了直到目前,整個座標不足的地方。這整個座標點中心證明它自己,是一種知識的理論,一名知識的哲學。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Anxiety 54 Jacques Lacan

November 28, 2010

Anxiety 54

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 7: Wednesday 9 January 1963

A surface with a single face cannot be turned inside out. For
effectively you take a Moebius strip;, you make it; you see that there are two ways to make it, depending on whether one turns, one makes the half turn that I spoke about above to the right or to the left and that they do not overlap. But if you turn one of them inside out it will always be identical to itself.

一個表面只有一個面向,無法從裏面向外翻轉。你們不妨實際去拿一個莫比斯帶,你們去製作一個。你們會看到,製作的方法有兩種,依靠它是否翻轉而定。一種是我以上所提到的一半的翻轉向右邊,或是向左邊。這樣它們才不會重疊。但是假如你們把其中一個從裏面向外翻轉,它總是跟自己一致。

This is what I call not having a specular image.

這就是我所謂的沒有自我理想的魅影意象。

You know on the other hand that I told you that in the cross-cap,
when, by means of a section, a cut, which has no other condition
than that of rejoining itself, after having included in it the hole-point of the cross-cap, when, I am saying, you isolate a part of the cross-cap, it remains a Moebius strip.

在另一方面,你們知道,我告訴你們,在這個十字帽,憑藉著一個部份,一個切割。這個切割沒有其他的條件,除了就是重新加入自己,當你已經在裏面,包含這個十字帽的洞口點。我是說,你們將這個十字帽的一部份孤立起來,它依舊是一條莫比斯帶。

Here is the residual part. I constructed it for you, I am passing it around. It has its interest because, let me tell you: this is o. I give it to you like a host, for you will make use of it subsequently.

在此,有殘餘的部份。我跟你們建構它,我正在將它傳遞出去。它有引入興趣的一面:這就是小客體。我像一位主人般送給你們,因為你們隨後會使用到它。

That is how o is made.

這就是小客體如何被製作的方式。

It is made like that when any cut whatsoever has occurred,
whether it is that of the cord, that of circumcision, and some
(18) others still which we will have to designate.

它像這樣被製作,當任何的切割已經發生,無論它是這個繩索的切割,包皮的切割,還有其他種類的切割,我們還有待指明的。

There remains, after this cut whatever it may be, something
comparable to the Moebius strip, something which does not have a specular image. Now then consider carefully what I want to tell you.

不管它是什麼種類的切割,在它切割之後,會有某件類似莫比斯帶的東西剩餘下來,某件沒有自我理想魅影的意象剩餘下來。現在,請仔細考慮一下,我所要告訴你們的內容。

The first phase, the vase which is here has its specular image,
the ideal ego, constitutive of the world of the common object.
Add to it o in the form of a cross-cap, and separate out in this cross-cap the little object o that I have placed in your hands.

第一個部份,在此這個花瓶擁有它的魅影的意象,這個理想的自我,它組成這個共同客體的世界。你們用一個十字帽的形式給它填加這個小客體,然後以這個十字帽的切割區隔我放在你們手中的這個小客體。

There remains, united to i'(o), the remainder, namely a Moebius strip, in other words – I am representing it for you here – it is the same thing as if you make there begin, from the opposite point of the edge of the vase, a surface which connects up with itself, as in the Moebius strip.

依舊有這個殘餘物,跟著這個理想自我的魅影連接在一起,換句話說,一條莫比斯帶。換句話說,我在此正在將它呈現給你們。這好像是跟你們從這個花瓶的邊緣的相反點那裏開始一個表面,這個表面跟自己連接,如同在莫比斯帶。

Because from that moment, the whole vase becomes a Moebius
strip, because an ant walking along the outside enters the
inside without any difficulty. The specular image becomes the
strange and invasive image of the double, becomes that which
happens little by little at the end of the life of Maupassant
when he begins by no longer seeing himself in the mirror,
or when he perceives in a room something which turns its back
on him and regarding which he immediately knows that he is
not without some relationship to this ghost, when the ghost
turns back, he sees that it is himself.

因為從那個時刻開始,整個的花瓶就成為一個莫比斯帶。因為一隻螞蟻沿著外面走著,毫無困難地進入裏面。這個理想自我的魅影意象,就成為這個奇怪而侵入的雙重的意象,成為法國小說家莫泊桑過世時,逐漸發生的現象:他不再能從鏡子裏看到自己。或是他在房間裏,他感覺到有某件東西,背朝著他。關於這個東西,他立刻知道,他跟這個鬼魂不是沒有一些關係。當這個鬼魂轉過身,他發現那就是他自己。

This is what is involved in the entry of o into the world of the real, which it is only returning to. And notice,_to end, what is involved. It may seem strange, bizarre to you as a hypothesis, that something reassembles this. Notice however that if we put it outside the operation of the visual field, behave like a blind man, close your eyes for a moment, and feeling your way, follow the edge of this transformed vase.

這就是小客體進入真實界所牽涉到的東西,小客體只是回去。請注意一下,為了要結束,所必須牽涉到的東西。對於你們而言,它作為一個假設的命題,似乎有點奇怪,有點古怪。某件東西將這個重新裝配起來。可是,請注意,假如我們將它放置在視覺領域運作的外面,就像一位瞎子一般地行為,閉上你們的眼睛一陣子,然後模索前進,遵照這個被轉變的花瓶的邊緣。

But it is a vase like the other, there is only one hole because there is only one edge. It appears to have two of them. And this ambiguity between the one and the two, I think that those who have simply read a little know that it is a common ambiguity concerning the apparition of the phallus in the field of dream appearance – and not only dreams – of the sexual organ where there apparently is no real phallus. Its ordinary mode of apparition is to appear in the form of two phalluses. There, that’s enough for today!

這個花瓶就像另外一個花瓶一樣,只有一個空洞,因為只有一個邊緣。它看起來似乎有兩個空洞。這個處於一個空洞及兩個空洞之間的模糊曖昧,我認為是,只有是稍微有過閱讀的人,都會知道,那是一個共同的模糊曖昧,關於這個陽具的魅影,性器官的出現在夢到領域。那裏顯而易見的,並沒有真實的陽具出現,(不但是在夢裏)。這個魅影的普通的模式,應該是以兩個陽具的形式出現。就在那裏,今天我們只能談論到這裏。

I would like to manage to tell you today a certain number of
things about what I have taught you to designate as the object o, this object o towards which the aphorism that I put forward the last time about anxiety orients us, namely that it is not without an object.

今天,我想要設法告訴你們某些的事情,關於我曾經教導你們如何指明這個客體,當著小客體。上一次,我曾經提出關於焦慮的這個簡短警語,它將我們引導朝向這個小客體。換句話,它並非沒有一個客體。

This is why the object o comes this year into the centre of our remarks. And if effectively it is inscribed in the
frame of this anxiety that I took as a title, it is precisely for the reason that it is essentially from this angle that it is possible to speak about it, which means again that anxiety is its only subjective expression.

這就是為什麽這個小客體今年會進入我們談論的中心。假如實際上它是被銘記在這個焦慮的框架裏,我使用焦慮來當這次講座的題目,那確實是因為基本上是從這個角度,我們才可能談論它。這再一次意味著,焦慮是它唯一的主體性的表達。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Anxiety 53 Jacques Lacan

November 27, 2010

Anxiety 53

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 7: Wednesday 9 January 1963

A very clear indication. The problem had been seen and let me tell you that it is not by chance, I mean by chance with respect to what I am in the process of developing before you. Only my remark is that here there is only an angle, and an inadequate angle: for, in reality, this phantasy used for an analysis which could not here exhaust what was involved, only rejoins a phantasy symptomatic of the obsessional.

這是一個很清楚的指示。問題已經被看出來,讓我告訴你們,關於我正在跟你們發展的內容,不是偶然發生。只是,我自己的評論是,在此只有一個角度,一個不充足的角度:實際上,這個被用來充當分析的幻見,在此不可能窮盡所牽涉到底東西,只是重新加入一個幻見,一個具有妄想症患者的病徵的幻見。

And to designate what I mean, I would go back here to a reference
which, in the literature, is really exemplary, namely the well
known nocturnal behavior of the Ratman when, having obtained by himself, his own erection in front of a mirror, he goes and opens the door to the landing, to his landing, to the imagined ghost of his dead father, to present, before the eyes of this spectre, the present state of his member.

為了指明我的意思是什麽,我將回到這裏尋找一個指稱。這個指稱,在文獻中是真正的一個典範。換句話說,眾所周知,鼠人的夜間的行為。當他在鏡子前面,自摸勃起陽具的時候,他去打開朝向樓梯口的門,朝向樓梯口,朝向他已經過世的父親的想像中的鬼魂,去呈現他的器官的目前的狀態,在這個魅影的眼睛前面。

To analyse what is involved then uniquely then at the level of this phantasy of the fellatio of the analyst so linked by the author in question to what he called the technique of rapprocher (getting closer) to the relationship of distance considered as essential, fundamental to the obsessional structure, specifically in its relationships with psychosis, is, I believe, simply to have allowed the subject, indeed even to have encouraged her to take on this phantastical reaction, which is that of the Ratman, to take on the role of this Other in the mode of presence which is precisely here constituted by death, of this other who looks, by pushing her even, I would say, a little further phantastically simply by the fellatio.

為了分析在精神分析師口交的這個幻見的層次,獨特所牽涉到的,我們討論中的那位作者將這個幻見,跟他所謂的「接近」距離的關係的技巧聯想在一起。這個距離的關係被認為是基本的,是妄想症患者結構的根本。明確來說,在它跟變態狂的關係,我相信,僅僅要讓這個生命的主體,的確,要鼓勵她從事這個幻影的反動,鼠人的幻影的反動。為了扮演這個大它者的角色,以存在的模式。這個存在的模式在此確實是由死亡所建構,由這個大它者。這個大它者,在幻影上,由於這個口交,看起來甚至將她稍微推遠一點,

It is obvious that this final point, this final term is only
addressed here to those whose practice allows them to put the
import of these remarks in their proper place.

顯而易見的,這個最後一點,這個最後的術語,在此我們只能對局內人而言。局內人的行業才容許他們,將這些談論的意義,不受扭曲地看待。

(16) I will end on the path on which we will advance further the next time, and to give their meaning to these two images which I have designated for you here in the right corner at the bottom of the board: the first represents a – this is not seen, in fact, at first sight – represents a vase, and its neck. I put the hole of this neck facing you to designate, to clearly stress for you that what is important for me is the edge.

今天我將在這裏告一段落,下一次我們將更進一步探討,然後給這兩個意象賦予意義。這兩個意象,我在黑板底端的右邊的角落,所跟你們指明的:第一個意象代表一個、、、它隱而不見。事實上,乍然一看,它代表一個花瓶及其瓶頸。我將這個瓶頸的空洞面向你們,為了指明,為了跟你們清楚地強調:我們覺得重要的地方是這個邊緣。

The second is the transformation which can be carried
out as regards this neck and this edge. Starting from
there, there is going to appear to you the opportuneness
of the long insistence that I placed last year on
topological considerations concerning the function of
identification – I specified it for you – at the level
of desire, namely the third type designated by Freud, in
his article on identification, the one whose major example
he finds in hysteria.

第二個意象是能夠被執行的轉變,關於這個瓶頸跟這個邊緣。從那裏開始,你們將會發現,我的固執堅持是有道理的,當去年我們討論有關認同的功用,我一直堅持要給予拓樸圖形的考慮。關於認同的功用,(我明確地跟你們指出),是在欲望的層次。換句話說,被佛洛伊德指明的第三種,在他討論「認同」的文章
這個認同的主要例子,他在歇斯底里症患者身上找到。

Here is the incidence and the import of these topological
considerations. I told you that I kept you so long on the crosscap to give you the possibility of intuitively conceiving what must be called the distinction between the object we are speaking about, o, and the object created, constructed starting from the specular relationship, the common object precisely concerning the specular image.

在此,就是這些拓樸圖形考慮到意義跟意外。我告訴過你們,我跟你談論這個內外難以分辨的十字帽的很久,為了讓你們有可能靠著本能構想,所謂的這區別是什麼?在我們正在談論的這個客體,跟被創造,被建構的客體之間的區別?後面這個客體是從這個自我理想的魅影的關係開始,這個共同的客體,確實是關係到這個魅影的意象。

To go quickly, I am going, I think, to remind you of it, in terms which are simple but adequate given the amount of work
accomplished previously.

為了很快地進展,我認為我將要提醒你們這件事,用簡單但是合宜的一些術語。那些術語是我先前完成的研究工作,所提供的。

What ensures that a specular image is distinct from that which it represents? It is that the right becomes the left and inversely.

什麼東西可以保證,一個自我理想的魅影是顯然不同于它所代表的東西?就在這個地方,右邊變成左邊,左邊變成右邊。

In other words, if we trust this idea – we usually have our
reward when we trust even the most aphoristic things in Freud – that the ego is a surface, it is in topological terms of pure surface that the problem ought to be posed: the specular image, with respect to what it duplicates, is exactly the passage from the right-hand glove to the left-hand glove, what one can obtain on a simple surface by turning the glove inside out.

換句話說,假如我們信任這個觀念,我們通常擁有我們的酬勞,假如我們對佛洛伊德所寫過,即使是短語警句,都心悅誠服。自我是一個表面,就用純粹表面的拓樸圖形的術語,這個難題應該被形成:這個自我理想的魅影意象,關於它所複製的東西。這確實是這個通道,從右手邊的手套,通往左手邊的手套,是我們所能夠獲得的東西,在一個簡單的表面,將手套由裏面向外面翻轉。

Remember that it was not today or yesterday that I spoke to you about the glove or the hood. The whole dream quoted by Ella (17) Sharpe turns for the most part around this model.
Try the experiment now with what I taught you to know – I hope
there are not many who do not know it yet – about the Moebius
strip, namely – I recall it for those who have not yet heard tell of it – you obtain very easily in any way whatsoever, by taking this belt, and after having opened it, fasten it again having given it meanwhile a half turn, you obtain a Moebius strip, namely something on which an ant walking along passes from one of these apparent faces to the other face, without needing to pass across the edge, namely a surface with a single face.

請記住,不光是今天或是昨天,我才跟你們談論到這個翻轉的手套或十字帽。艾拉、夏普所引述的整個的夢想,大部份都繞著這個模式運轉。現在,你們不妨嘗試一下這個試驗,用我教導你們的方法。我希望,你們大部份的人都已經知道,換句話說,關於這個莫比斯翻轉帶。(我跟那些還沒有聽過我講述的人提醒它)。你們很容易用任何方法來表現,拿著這條腰帶,打開以後,給它作一半的翻轉,然後綁緊它。你們就有一條莫比斯腰帶,換句話說,你們有某件東西,螞蟻沿這些光滑的表面,一直走到另一個表面,而不需要越過這個邊緣,換句話說,一個表面只有單一的面向。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Anxiety 52 Jacques Lacan

November 27, 2010

Anxiety 52

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 7: Wednesday 9 January 1963

I said a lot of things, certainly in a form which was the most
appropriate one, namely in a form that was partly veiled. It is certain that previously in the earlier work on transference to (13) which I have just alluded and which contributed a division as brilliant as that of the opposition between the need for repetition and the repetition of need (the work of Lagache), you see that having recourse to a play on words to designate things – which moreover are not without their interest – is not simply my privilege.

我說過許多事情,確實是以最得體的方式。換句話說,我說得很含蓄。的確,在先前討論移情的早期著作中,我剛剛所提到的,它們提供一個明顯的區分,諸如重複的需求跟需求的重複的對立,(拉加奇的著作)。你們看到,訴諸於文字的遊戲,來指明事情,並不僅是我的專擅。而且,這些事情並非沒有引人入勝的地方。

But I think that the reference to transference, to limit it uniquely to the effects of repetition, to the effects of
reproduction, is something that would altogether deserve to be extended, and that the synchronic dimension risks, through
insisting on the historical element, on the element of the
repetition of lived experience, risks in any case, risks leaving to one side a whole no less important dimension which is precisely what can appear, what is included, latent in the
position of the analyst, through which there lies in the space
that he determines, the function of this partial object.

但是我認為,提到移情,將它限制於重複的影響,是某件完全應該值得延伸的事情。這個同時性的向度所冒的危險,透過堅持歷史的因素,堅持生活過的經驗的重複,無論如何是冒著危險的,冒著將整體同樣重要的向度,偏向一旁的危險。這個整體的向度,在精神分析師的立場,確實會出現,會被包含,會潛在那裏。透過這個精神分析師的立場,這個部份客體的功用,就位在他所決定的空間那裏。

This is what, in speaking to you about transference, if you
remember, I designated by the metaphor, which is clear enough it seems to me, of the hand which stretches out towards the log and at the moment of reaching this log, this log bursts into flames, and in the flames another hand appears which stretches out towards the first one.

假如你們還記得,當我跟你們提到有關移情時,這就是我用比喻所指明的。我覺得,這個比喻是顯而易見。有只手朝向圓木伸過去,就在到達這個圓木時,這根圓木突然燃燒起來。在火焰當中,另外一隻手出現,伸向第一隻手。

This is what I also designated, in studying Plato’s Symposium, by the function named agalma in the discourse of Alcibiades.

這也是我所指明,當我研讀柏拉圖的「饗宴」,在阿西比底斯的論述中,一位名叫阿嘉瑪的人扮演的功用。

I think that the inadequacy of the synchronic reference to the function of the partial object in the analytic relationship, in the transference relationship, establishes the basis for opening a dossier concerning a domain which I am and am not astonished, not surprised in any case, to see left in the shade, namely that a certain number of failures in the sexual function can be considered as distributed in a certain field of what we can call post-analytic results.

我認為,在精神分析的關係,在移情的關係,同時性的心靈交會,若僅是指稱到部份客體的功用,是有所不足。這建立了這個基礎,展開有關一個領域的檔案。在那裏,若是讓我看到許多陰影的東西,我絲毫不會大吃一驚。換句話說,在性愛功用的無數的失敗,可以被認為是,歸類到我們所謂的後精神分析學到結果的某些領域。

I believe that this analysis of the function of the analyst as the space of the field of the partial object, is precisely that before which, from the analytic point of view, Freud brought us to a halt in his article on “Analysis terminable and interminable”, and if one starts from the idea that Freud’s
limit, was – one finds it right through all his observations -(14) the non-perception of what is properly to be analysed in the synchronic relationship between the analysand and the analyst concerning this function of the partial object, one will see there – and if you wish, I will come back to it – the very source of his failure – of the failure of his intervention with Dora, with the woman in the case of feminine homosexuality, one will see in it especially why Freud designates for us in castration anxiety what he calls the limit of analysis, precisely in the measure that he remained for his analysand the seat, the locus of this partial object.

我相信,精神分析學以精神分析師,充當部份客體領域的空間的功用,從精神分析的觀點,佛洛伊德要求我們停下來三思的東西,在他那篇論「有限度及無限度地精神分析學」的文章裏。假如我們從這個觀念開始,(我們在他所有的觀察中直接可以找到),佛洛伊德的限度是這種漠然無感:在被分析者跟分析師之間,會有同時性的心靈交會,適當來說,應該被分析的東西。關於部份客體的這個功用,我們在那裏將會看到,他的失敗的來源,(你們若是願意,我還會回頭談論)。他介入朵拉個案的失敗,他介入女性同性戀個案的這個女人的失敗。我們在裏面可以看出,特別是為什麼他稱呼這個,為精神分析的限度。確實是因為對於他的被分析者而言,他始終保持在這個位置,這個部份客體的軌跡。

If Freud tells us that analysis leaves man and woman unsatisfied, the one in the field of what is properly called in the case of the male the castration complex and the other about Penisneid, this is not an absolute limit, it is the limit where finite analysis ends with Freud, it is the limit which continues to follow this indefinitely approached parallelism which characterises the asymptote.

假如佛洛伊德告訴我們,精神分析學並沒有使男人跟女人都滿足,男人不滿足的個案,發生在所謂的閹割情結的領域。女人的不滿足,發生在所謂的「陽具羡慕」。這不是一個絕對的限度,在這個限度,有限的精神分析學跟隨佛洛伊德而告終。這個限度繼續跟隨這個以無定限度方式到達的對比,這個對比表現出這個「漸近線」的特性。

The analysis which Freud calls indefinite, unlimited (and not infinite) analysis, occurs in the measure that something about which I can at least pose the question as to how it is analysable, had been not, I would say, unanalysed, but revealed only in a partial fashion where this limit is established.

這種精神分析學,佛洛伊德稱之為「無定限」,「無限度」的精神分析學。它發生在某件事情上,關於這件事情,我至少能夠提出一些問題,有關它如何能夠被分析。容我這樣說,它並不是從來沒有被分析過,但只是以部份的方式顯示,在那裏,這個限度被建立。

You must not believe that I am saying here, that I am
contributing here something again which ought to be considered as completely outside the limits of the blueprint already sketched out by our experience, because after all, to refer to recent and familiar works in the French domain of our work, it is around penis envy, that one analyst made his analysis of obsessionals in particular turn, through the years that made up the time of his writing. How often in the course of previous years have I commented on these observations for you in order to criticize them, to show in them, with what we-had at that time to hand, what I considered as their stumbling point.

你們一定不要相信,我在這裏所說的,我在這裏是提供某件東西,它應該被認為是完全在這個藍圖的限度以外的東西,我們精神分析經驗所描繪的藍圖。畢竟,提到我們精神分析學在法國的領域,最近大家耳熟能詳的研究工作,都是繞著陽具羡慕的主題。有一位精神分析師從事他對於妄想症患者的精神分析,幾年來,他孜孜不倦地從事這樣的寫作。在過去前幾年來,有多少次,我曾經跟你們評論這些的研究觀察。我批評他們,用當時我們必須處理的東西,跟他們揭露我所認為的他們失誤的盲點。

I would formulate here, in a more precise fashion, at the point of explanation that we are getting to, what is involved, what I meant.

我將在此說明,以更加明確的方式,關於所牽涉到的東西,以及我的用意,我們正在予以解釋。

What was involved – you see it from a detailed reading of these
(15) observations – what was involved if not the filling of this field which I designate as the interpretation to be made of the phallic function at the level of the big Other whose place is held by the analyst and the covering, I would say, of this place with the phantasy of fellatio, and especially concerning the analyst’s penis.

所牽涉到的內涵,(從詳細地閱讀這些研究觀察,你們可以看出),所牽涉到的內涵,難道不就是填補這個領域?我指明這個領域,是陽具的功用應該從大它者的層次,予以解釋。大它者的位置被精神分析師所佔據,以及這個位置充斥著性愛時口交的幻見,特別是關係到精神分析師的陰莖。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw