Anxiety 243 Jacques Lacan

Anxiety 243

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
22.5.63 XIX 224
Seminar 20: Wednesday 29 May 1963

What is demanded at the genital level and from whom? That
effectively the experience which is so common, fundamental that it ends up in its obviousness by no longer noticing its relief, effectively interhuman copulation with the transcendency it has compared to individual existence –

在性器官的層次,什麼東西被要求?跟誰要求?有效地,這個經驗是如此普遍,如此基本,以致於它顯而易見的結果是,不再注意到這個救濟,有效地是人際之間跟超驗的神的性愛交媾。它將這個超驗的神,比喻為個人的存在。

we needed the detour of a rather advanced biology to be able to notice the strict (9) correlation between the appearance of bisexuality and the emergence of the function of individual death, but after all people always had a presentiment that in this act where there is bound closely, then, what we ought to call the survival of the species conjoined with something which cannot fail, if the words have a meaning, to involve what we have located at the final term as the death drive, after all why should we refuse to see what is immediately tangible in facts that we know quite well, which are
signified in the most common usages of the tongue – we demand – I have not yet said from whom, but after all since it is necessary always to demand something from someone, it happens that it is from our partner, is it quite sure that it is from her, we will have to see in a second phase – but what we demand is what?

我們需要一個相當高級生物學到這個迂迴,才能夠注意到這個緊密的相互關係,存在於雙性戀的表像,跟個人的死亡的功用的出現之間。但是畢竟,人們總是會有預感,在這個演出,我們應該稱為品種的生存,跟某件東西的結合,會有緊密的連繫。這個東西一定會牽涉到我們在最後的術語所找到的東西,作為死亡的驅力,假如文字有意義的話。畢竟,我們為什麼要拒絕看到,在這些我們耳熟能詳的事實中,具體而當下的東西?這些東西大家在日常的口語表達,就顯現出來。我們要求,我還沒有說是從誰那裏,但是畢竟這總是必要的,從某個人要求某件東西。我們恰巧從我們的伴侶要求,這難道不是很確定嗎?從她那裏,我們將必須看到一個第二部份,但是我們要求的是什麼?

It is to satisfy a demand which has a certain relationship with death. What we demand does not go very far: it is the little death (la petit mort); but after all it is clear that we demanded it. That the drive is intimately mingled with this
drive of the demand, that we demand to make love (1’amour), if you wish to make “l’amourir”, it is to die (mourir), it is even to die laughing (de rire)2 It is not for nothing that I underline that which in love participates in what I call the comic feeling. In any case it is indeed here that there ought to reside post-orgasmic relaxation. If what is satisfied is this demand, well then God knows, it is to be really satisfied, one gets out of it!

這是要滿足一個要求。這個要求擁有某種的關係跟死亡。我們所要求的,並沒有很深入。我們只要求小小的死亡;但是畢竟,顯而易見的,我們要求死亡。死亡的驅力跟要求的這個驅力,親密混合在一起。我們要求做愛,或是說得委婉些,纏綿得欲死欲仙,那就是要求死亡。那甚至是慷慨就死。我這樣強調並非沒有意義,我強調,戀愛會參與到我所謂的滑稽的感覺。無論如何,確實就是在這裏,應該存在著一種性高潮後的鬆弛。假如我們所被滿足的,就是這個要求,天曉得,為了真正滿足,我們應該逃避滿足。

The advantage of this conception is to make appear, to give the reason, why anxiety appears in a certain number of ways of obtaining orgasm.

這個觀念的優點,就是要讓這個理由出現,要提出這個理由,為什麼焦慮會以某些獲得性高潮的的方式出現。

In the whole measure that orgasm is detached from this field of the demand of the other – it is the first apprehension that Freud had of it in coitus interruptus – anxiety appears, as one might say, in this margin of the loss of signification.

性高潮跟大它者的要求的這領域,要整個的區隔開來。這是佛洛伊德第一擁有的憂慮,在性交的中斷。焦慮會出現,我們不妨這樣說,在意義損失的這個邊緣。

But as such, it continues to designate what is aimed at in terms of a certain relationship to the other. I am precisely not in the process of saying that castration anxiety is an anxiety about death; it is an anxiety which refers to the field where death is closely bound up with the renewal of life, it is an anxiety which, if we localise it at this point, allows us to understand very well why it is equivalently interpretable as the reason why it is given to us, in Freud’s final conception, as the signal of a threat to the status of the defended “I”.

但是就本身而言,它繼續指明所要到達的目標,以跟大它者的某種的關係的術語。我確實並不是正在說,閹割焦慮是一種關於死亡的焦慮;它是一種焦慮,會提到這個領域,死亡跟生命的重生有密切的關聯。它是一種焦慮,假如我們在這一點找到位置,使我們能夠清楚瞭解,為什麼它同樣能夠被解釋為這個理由,為什麼在佛洛伊德的最後的觀念,我們被告訴,對於這個被防衛的「我」的地位,這是一個威脅的訊號。

It refers to a beyond of this defended “I”, at this point of appeal (10) for a jouissance which goes beyond our limits, in so far as here the other is properly speaking evoked in this register of the real which is how a certain type, a certain form of life is transmitted and is sustained.

它提到這個被防衛的「我」的一個超越,以訴諸於「歡爽」的這個點。這個歡爽超越了限制,因為在此適當地說,大它者被召喚出來,在真實界的銘記裏。這就是某種的生命的形態被傳遞,被維持。

Call that whatever you wish, God or the genius of the species. I think that I have already sufficiently implied in my discourse that this does not carry us towards any metaphysical heights. What is involved here is a real, this something which maintains what Freud articulated at the level of his Nirvana principle as being this property of life, of having, in order to reach death, to repass by forms which reproduce the ones which had given to the individual form the occasion of appearing through the conjunction of two sexual cells.

至於這位大它者的名稱,隨你們怎麼稱呼,上帝或是人傑天才。我認為,我已經充份地暗示,在我的真理的論述裏。這種論述並沒有將我們帶向形上學的高地。在此所牽涉到的是一個真實界,這個某件東西,維持佛洛伊德所表達,在他的涅槃的原理,當著是生命的這個屬性,擁有的這個屬性,為了要到達死亡,為了重新經過一些形式。這些形式複製給予個人形式的機會,透過性細胞的結合而出現。

What does that mean? What does that mean as regards what happens
at the level of the object? What does it mean, if not that in short this result, that I called such a successful result, is only realised in such a satisfactory fashion in the course of a certain automatic cycle that remains to be defined and because precisely of the fact that the organ is never able to hold up very long on the path of the appeal for jouissance.

那是什麼意思?關於在客體的層次發生的事情,那是什麼意思?它的意思難道不就是,總之這個結果,我稱為是成功的結果,只有以如此令人滿意的方式實現?在某種自動迴圈的過程,這個迴圈還有待定義,因為確實是這個事實:器官永遠無法支持長久,在訴諸於歡爽的途徑上。

With regard to this end of jouissance and to reaching this appeal of the other in a term which would be tragic, the amboceptor organ can always be said to give way prematurely.

關於這個歡爽的目的,以及關於到達大它者的這個訴求,它的術語將是悲劇,這個雙重抗體的器官,總是可以說是過早地消腫。

At the moment, I might say, that it could be the sacrificial
object, well then, let us say in the ordinary case it has long
disappeared from the scene. It is no longer anything but a
little rag, it is no longer there except as a testimony, as a memory for the partner in tenderness. In the castration complex, this is what is involved, in other words this only becomes a drama in so far as there is raised, pushed in a certain direction – one which places all its trust in genital consummation – the putting in question of desire.

此時,我不妨說,它可能是這個犧牲奉獻的客體。讓我們從普通的例子來說,它長期以來就從場景消失。它不再是任何東西,除了就是一塊小小的破布。它不再在那裏,除了充當一個證明,當著一個記憶,對於恩愛纏綿的伴侶。對於這個閹割情結,這是牽涉到東西,換句話說,它只是變成一個被引發,被推向某個方向的戲劇。這場戲劇將它的整個信任都寄託在性器官的高潮,這是欲望的質疑。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.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 )

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: