Archive for January, 2011

Anxiety 251 Jacques Lacan

January 27, 2011

Anxiety 251

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
5.6.63 XXI 247
Seminar 21: Wednesday 5 June 1963

And we rediscover here my instrument of the other day, the shofar of the synagogue. What gives its meaning to this possibility that for an instant it can be entirely musical – is this elementary fifth even music, this deviation of a fifth in it? – that it can be a substitute for the word, by powerfully wrenching our ear away from all its customary harmonies.

我們在此重新發現我前天的工具,猶太教堂的羊角號。它有可能有一陣子完全是音樂,然後被賦予它的意義,難道這是這個基本的均勻音樂第五分譜的間隔,第五音譜的這個偏離?它有時是這個文字的一個代替品,強而有力地擰緊我們的耳朵,避開它的習慣性的和諧。

It models the locus of our anxiety, but, let us note, only after the desire of the Other has taken the form of a commandment. That is why it can play its eminent function of giving to anxiety its resolution, whether it is called guilt or pardon, and which is precisely the introduction of a different order. The fact that desire is a lack is fundamental here, we will say that it is its “primordial fault”, fault in the sense that something is lacking (fait defaut).

它模擬我們焦慮的軌跡。但是讓我們注意到,只有在大它者的欲望形成一個命令的形式之後。那就是為什麼它能夠扮演它的傑出的功用,給予焦慮它的解決方法。無論它被稱為罪惡感,或是寬恕。這確實是一個不同秩序的介紹。欲望是一個欠缺這個事實,在此是基本的。我們將會說,這是它的「原始的錯誤」。這個錯誤的意義是:某件東西是欠缺的。

Change the meaning of this fault by giving it a content
in the articulation of what? Let us leave it in suspense. And
this is what explains the birth of guilt and its relationship to anxiety.

改變這個欠缺的意義,以賦予它一個內容,在什麼的表達上?讓我們將它留置在懸疑當中。這就是為什麼罪惡感的誕生,以及它跟焦慮的關係。

In order to know what can be made of it, it is necessary for me to lead you into a field which is not that of this year, but which we must engage a little with here. I said that I did not know what, in the shofar, let us say the clamour of guilt, is articulated from the Other who covers anxiety.

為了要知道什麼能夠被用來解釋它,我需要引導你們到一個領域,並不是今年的領域。但是我們必須在此稍微用心一下。我說,我並不知道是什麼,在羊角號裏,讓我們說,會有罪惡感的這種疾呼被表達出來,從涵蓋焦慮的大它者那裏。

If our formula is correct, something like the desire of the Other must be involved in it.

假如我們的公式是正確的,某件像是大它者的欲望一定牽涉在裏面。

I will give myself three more minutes to introduce something
which prepares the way and next time we will be able to take our next step, namely to tell you that what is here most favourably prepared to be illuminated reciprocally, is the notion of (12) sacrifice.

我將再給予我自己三分鐘來介紹某件東西,作為鋪路。這樣下一次我們將能夠採取我們的下一步。換句話說,告訴你們,在此最有利的準備的互相啟明,就是犧牲奉獻的觀念。

Many other people besides me have tried to tackle what is
involved in sacrifice. I will tell you – we are short of time – briefly, that sacrifice is destined, not at all to be an offering or a gift which spreads itself into a quite different dimension, but to be the capture of the Other as such in the network of desire.

除了我之外,許多其他的人曾經設法克服犧牲奉獻所牽涉到的問題。我將告訴你們,(時間快不夠了,)簡短地說,犧牲奉獻根本就不是註定是一種貢物,或是禮物,擴散自己到一個完全不同的向度,而是被大它者本身的捕捉,在欲望的網路裏。

The matter should already be perceptible, namely what it is
reduced to for us on the ethical plane. It is a common
experience that we do not live our lives, whoever we are, without ceaselessly offering to some unknown divinity or other the sacrifice of some little mutilation that we impose on ourselves, validly or not, in the field of our desires
Not all the underpinnings of the operation are visible.

這件事情應該已經被感覺到,換句話說,對於我們而言,它被化簡到倫理的層次。這是一個共同的經驗:無論我們是誰,每當我們過著我們的生活,我們就會不停地提供某種小小的割捨的犧牲奉獻,給某種無名的神祗。這些割捨,我們賦加在我們自己之上,無論是有效或無效,在我們欲望的這個領域。這種運作的基礎,並不是全部都那麼清楚可見。

That it is a matter of something which refers to o as pole of our desire is not in doubt. But it will be necessary, the next time, for me to show you that something more is necessary, and specifically – I hope that at this meeting I will have a large convent of obsessionals – and specifically that this o is something already consecrated, which is something that cannot be conceived of except by taking up again in its original form what is involved in sacrifice.

無可置疑的,這個問題是提到客體,作為我們的欲望的極端。下一次,我會有需要跟你們顯示,還有某件東西是必需的。明確地說,我希望在這個演講會中,我將會有許多受到情感困擾的未婚女士的聽眾。明確地說,這個客體是某件已經被奉為犧性奉獻的東西。這個某件東西無法被感覺到,除了再一次將犧牲奉獻牽涉到內涵,從事它的原初的形式。

We no doubt have for our part, lost our gods in the great fair of civilisation, but a rather prolonged time at the origin of all peoples shows that there is linked into them from the beginning like real persons, not omnipotent gods, but gods powerful where they were. The whole question was to know whether these gods desired something. Sacrifice consisted in behaving as if they desired like us: therefore o has the same structure. That does not mean that they are going to eat what is sacrificed to them, nor even that it can be of any use to them; but the important thing is that they desire it and, I would say further, that this does not provoke anxiety in them.

無可置疑的,就我們而言,在文明的大市集,我們已經失去我們的諸神。但是在各個民族的起源,有一段相當漫長的時間,顯示出來,從一開始,就像我們人們一樣,跟它們息息相關的,並不是無所不能的神祗,而是強而有力的神祗,在他們所在地地方。整個的問題是要知道,是否這些神祗欲望某件東西。犧性奉獻在於:神祗的行為好像他們像我們人類一樣擁有欲望

For there is something else that up to the present no one, I believe, has resolved in a satisfactory fashion: the victims
always had to be without stain. Now remember what I told you
about the stain at the level of the specular field: with the
stain there appears, there is prepared the possibility of the
resurgence, in the field of desire, of what is hidden behind,
namely in this case this eye whose relationship with this field
must necessarily be elided in order that desire can remain there with this ubiquitous, even vaqabond possibility, which in any case allows it to escape from anxiety.

但是還有某件其他的東西,一直到現在,我相信沒有人曾經以令人滿意的方式解決:受害者總是必須沒有污點。現在請記住我所告訴你們的,關於這個污點,處於魅影領域的這個層次:隨著這個污點而來,就是隱藏在背後的內涵,復活再現的可能性的準備,在欲望的這個領域。換句話說,在這個情形,這個眼睛跟這個領域的關係,必須要被省略,這樣欲望才會始終在那裏,可能無所不在,也可能到處飄泊。無論如何,這個可能使欲望能夠從焦慮逃避出來。

To tame the god in the snare of desire is essential, and not to awaken anxiety.

我們需要馴服掉落在欲望陷阱裏的神祗,但是不要喚醒焦慮。

Time forces me to end. You will see that, however lyrical this
last diversion may appear to you, it will serve us as a guide in the much more day-to-day realities of our experience.

由於時間關係,我不得不結束。你們將會看出,無論這個最後的偏離多麼的抒情,它將跟我們充當一個引導,在我們精神分析經驗的日常現實界中。

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

Anxiety 250 Jacques Lacan

January 27, 2011

Anxiety 250

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
5.6.63 XXI 247
Seminar 21: Wednesday 5 June 1963

A pot also is a tube, and one that can resonate. And the
question of what we have said, that ten absolutely similar pots absolutely do not fail to impose themselves as individually different, but the question can be posed as to whether if, when one puts one in the place of the other, the void which was successively at the heart of each one of them is always the same.

一個壺也是一個管子,能夠迴響的管子。我們剛剛所說的問題,十個絕對相似的壺,一定會賦加它們自己,作為個別不同的壺。但是關於是否這個空無總是相同的問題能夠被提出,當我們將一個壺代替另外一個壺時。這個空無連續地處於它們的每一個空間。

Now, it is indeed from the commandment which imposes the void at the heart of the acoustic tube for anything of this reality which may resonate there which opens out onto a further step of our progress, which is not so simple to define, namely what is called a breath, namely that for all possible breaths, a flute at the level of one of its openings imposes the same vibration.

現在,對於這個現實界的任何東西而言,確實是從賦加在空無上面的這個命令,處於聲音管子的核心。這個現實界迴響在那裏,替我們精神分析經驗的進步,開展向前的一步。這一步不是那麼容易下定義,換句話說,所謂的「呼吸」,也就是說,儘管各個可能的呼吸,一個笛子處它的開口處,賦加相同的振動。

If it is not the law, indicating for us this something where the o involved, functions with a real function of mediation.

假如這個並不是法則,跟我們指示著,這個某件東西。在那裏,牽涉到的客體,以一個真實的仲介的功用,發揮功用。

Well now let us not yield to this illusion. All of this is only of interest as a metaphor. If the voice, in the sense that we understand it, has an importance, it is not that of resonating in any spatial void, it is in so far as the formula, the most simple elision in what is called linguistically its phatic function, which is believed to be a simple making contact, which is indeed something else, resonates in a void which is the void of the Other as such, the ex nihilo properly speaking.

現在不要讓我們屈服這個幻覺。所有這些,對於我們具有的興趣是一種比喻。假如聲音,依照我們瞭解它的意義,具有重要性,那不是因為它在任何空間的空無的迴響的意義,而是這個公式,最簡單的母音省略,在語言學所謂的交流感情的功用。這個功用被認為是人際之間簡單的接觸。這確實是某件其他的事情,在空無中迴響。這就是大它者本身的空無。適當地說,它是「無中生有」。

The voice responds to what is said, but it cannot answer for it. In other words: in order for it to respond, we have to incorporate the voice as otherness of what is said.

這個聲音回應所被說的話,但是它無法負責它。換句話說,為了讓它回應,我們必須合併這個聲音,作為所說內容的它者。

(10) It is indeed for this reason, and not for any other, that
detached from ourselves, our voice appears to us to have a
strange sound. The structure of the Other, in itself,
constitutes a certain void, the void of its lack of guarantee.
The truth enters the world with the signifier and before any
control.

確實是因為這個理由,不是別的理由,當我們跟我們自己疏離時,我們會覺得我們的聲音怪怪的。這個大它者的結構本身,組成某一種的空無,它的保證的欠缺的空無。真理跟著這個意符進入這個世界,在接受任何的控制之前。

It is experienced, it refers itself on only by its
echoes into the real. Now, it is in this void that the voice qua distinct from sonorities, the not modulated but articulated voice resonates. The voice involved, is the voice qua imperative, in so far as it calls for obedience or conviction, that it situates itself, not with respect to music, but with respect to the word.

真理被經驗到,真理提到它自己,只有當它迴響進入真實界。現在,就在這個空無當中,聲音本身跟響亮不同,沒有被調適,但是已經被表達出來的聲音迴響著。牽涉到的聲音,就是作為命令的聲音。它要求服從或是相信。它定位它自己,不是關於音樂,而是關於文字。

It would be interesting to see the distance that exists, in
connection with this well-known miscognition of the recorded
voice, between the experience of the singer and that of the
orator. I propose to those who are willing to do some research
for free on this, to do it: I do not have the time to do it
myself.

耐人尋味的是看到存在的距離,關於被記錄的聲音的這個著名的誤認。它存在於歌唱者的聲音及演說家的聲音之間。我跟那些人建議去做,那些願意免費從事這個研究的人。我自己沒有時間來做。

But I believe that it is here that we put our finger on this
distinct form of identification that I was not able to approach
last year, which ensures that the identification of the voice
gives us at least the first model which ensures that in certain
cases we are not speaking about the same identification as in the others, we speak about Einverleibung, of incorporation.
The psychoanalysts of the right generation were aware of this.

但是我相信,就在這裏我們掌握到認同的清楚的形式,那是我去年無法探討的東西。這的形式保證,聲音的認同給予我們至少第一個模式。這個模式在某些的情況,保證我們正在談論的認同,跟其他的認同並不相同,跟我們談論的合併的認同,並不相同。以前那一代的精神分析師並不知道這件事。

There was a certain Mr Isakover who wrote in the 20th year of the International Journal a very remarkable article which moreover to my mind is only of interest because of the need he felt to give a really striking image of what was distinct in this type of identification.

有某一位艾撒克勃先生,在精神分析國際期刊的第二十年,發表一篇非常傑出的文章。而且,依照我的看法,這篇文章的趣味在於他感覺有需要去生動地描繪,這種認同引人注意的地方。

Because, as you will see, he is going to look for it in something whose relationships – as you will see – are singularly more distant from the phenomenon than …

你們看出,他會在某件東西裏尋找認同。(你們會看出,)這件東西的關係顯而易見地,迴異於這個現象。

For that purpose, if he interests himself in the little animal
which is called the [Palaemon], if I remember rightly, because I have not had time to check this memory – which is called, I believe, Daphnia and which without being at all a shrimp you can present it to yourself as greatly resembling it.

為了那個目的,假如他對這個被稱為「小蝦」的小動物感到興趣,假如我記得沒有錯誤,因為我沒有時間去核對這個記憶。我相信它被稱為「蝦類」,但是它並不是蝦子。你們可以自己表達它,當著是酷似蝦子。

In any case, this animal which lives in salt water has the curious habit, as we would say in our language, of plugging the shell during its metamorphoses with tiny grains of sand, of introducing them into what it has in terms of a reduced apparatus described as (11) stato-acoustic, in other words into the utricles – for it does not have our extraordinary cochlea – into the utricles, having introduced these lumps of sand – because it has to put them in from outside, because it does not produce them of itself in any way – the utricle closes again and here it is inside these little bells that are necessary for its equilibrium.

無論如何,這個生活在鹽水裏的動物,有著奇怪的習慣,如同我們的語言裏所說的。在變形的時候,它會將沙粒塞進貝殼裏面,然後讓沙粒進入被描述為「靜態聲音的化簡儀器」。換句話說,進入前列腺囊。因為它並沒有特別的耳蝸。當這些沙粒被塞進了後,進入前列腺囊。因為它必須將它們從前面放進去。這個前列腺囊再一次封閉。在此,就在這些小小的鐘狀物,對它的平衡是必須的。

It brings them in from outside. You must admit that the relationship with the constitution of the superego is rather distant; nevertheless what interests me, is that Mr Isakover did not think he could find any better comparison than to refer himself to this operation.

它將沙粒從外面帶進來。你們必須承認,這個跟超我的構成的關係是相當遙遠的。可是,我感到興趣的是,艾撒克勃先生並不認為,他能夠找到更好的比較,比將他自己提到這個運作。

You have all the same, I hope, heard being awakened
in yourselves the echoes of physiology, and you know that
malicious experimenters substituted grains of steel for grains of sand, as a way of amusing themselves subsequently with the Daphnia and a magnet.

我希望,你們依舊曾經聽過,生理的迴響這你們自己身上被喚醒。你們知道,惡意的試驗者使用鋼粒代替沙粒,作為一種跟小人物及大人物互為娛樂的方式。

A voice therefore is not assimilated but it is incorporated, this is what can give it a function in modelling our void.

因此聲音並沒有被吸收,但是被合併。這就是為什麼它是一種模擬我們的空無的功用。

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

Anxiety 249 Jacques Lacan

January 26, 2011

Anxiety 249

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
5.6.63 XXI 247
Seminar 21: Wednesday 5 June 1963

Here and now, I indicate to you that as regards these problems, as you see, of genesis and of development, this famous schema which has bored you so much throughout these years, will regain
its value. In any case, this monologue of the small child that I am speaking to you about, never happens when someone else is there: a younger brother, another baby in the room, is enough for it not to happen.

此時此地,我跟你們指示,關於這些創始及發展的問題,如你們所見,這幾年來使你們感到厭煩的這個基模,會重新獲得它的價值。無論如何,小孩的這個獨白,我現在跟你們談論的,從來沒有發生,當某一個其他的人在那裏時。只要房間裏另外有兄弟,有另外的小孩,這個獨白就不會發生。

Many other characteristics indicate that what is happening at this level, which, as you -will see, is so astonishingly revelatory of the precociousness of what are described as the primordial tensions in the unconscious, we cannot doubt that we have here something that is at every point analogous to the function of the dream.

許多其他的特徵指示著,在這個層次發生的事情,你們將會看出,在無意識界,原初的緊張所被描述的早熟,是如此令人驚奇的顯示。以致於我們無法懷疑,在此我們擁有某件東西,道道地地類同於夢到功用。

Everything happens on “another stage” with the accent that I have given to this term. And ought we not to be guided here by the little door itself – it is never anything but a bad way through which I introduce you here to the problem – namely concerning what is involved, which is the constitution of o as remainder, that in any case, if its conditions are indeed the ones I have (8) told you about, we for our part only have this phenomenon in the state of a remainder, namely on the tape of the recorder.

這一切都發生在「另外一個階段」,以我給予這個術語的強調。在此,我們不應該被這座小門所引導,(那確實不是一很好的方式,我在此跟你們介紹這個難題。)換句話說,關於所被牽涉的東西,這就是客體的形成的剩餘物。無論如何,假如它的情況確實就是我告訴你們的情況,就我們而言,我們只有處於一個剩餘物的這個現象,換句話說,就是處於答錄機的帶子的現象。。

In other words, we have at the very most the distant murmur that is always ready to be interrupted when we appear.

換句話說,我們至多擁有這個遙遠的喃喃獨白。每當我們出現時,它總是被打斷。

Does this not prompt us to consider that a way is presented to us to grasp that for the subject who is in the process of
constituting himself, it is also in a voice detached from its
support that we ought to search for this remainder.

這難道不是激發我們去考慮,一個方式被呈現給於我們,為了要瞭解,對於生命的主體,

Pay very careful attention: we must not go too quickly here.
Ordinary experience is that everything the subject receives from the Other through language is received in a vocal form.

請仔細注意:我們在此一定不要過早推論。普通的經驗是,生命主體從大它者那裏透過語言接收的一切,都是以聲音的方式被接收。

But we know very well, in an experience which is not all that rare, even though one evokes always the most spectacular cases, Helen Keller, that there are ways other than the vocal one to receive language, there are other ways for receiving language, language is not vocalisation (cf the deaf).

但是我們心知肚明,在一個並不罕見的經驗裏,即使我們總是召喚最傑出的個案,海倫、凱勒。除了聲音以外,總是有其他的方法來接收語言。語言並不就是聲音。(例如,對於耳聾的人。)

Nevertheless, I believe that we can advance in the direction that a relationship that is more than accidental links language to sonority.

可是,我相信,我們能夠朝著一個關係前進。這個關係不僅是意外地聯接語言跟聲音的響亮。

And we will believe perhaps that we even are advancing
along the right path in trying to articulate things closely in qualifying this sonority, for example, as instrumental.

也許我們將會相信,我們甚至前進,沿著這條正確的途徑,當我們設法仔細地表達事情,讓這個響亮的聲音具有例如工具性的特質。

It is a fact that physiology opens the path here. We do not know everything about the functioning of the ear, but we know all the same that the cochlea is a resonator, a complex or composite resonator, if you wish, but after all a composite resonator is decomposed into a composition of elementary resonators.

這是一個事實,心理學在此展開這條研究途徑。對於耳朵的功用,我們並不全然明白。但是我們仍然知道耳蝸是一個迴響器,一個複雜或是綜合的迴響器。但是畢竟,一個綜合的迴響器,會被分解成為基本的迴響器的組合。

This leads us along a path which is the following, that what is proper to resonance is that it is the apparatus which dominates in it.

這引導我們沿著一條以下的途徑,迴響的本體是,在裏面支配它的是指個儀器。

It is the apparatus which resonates. It does not resonate to
just anything, it only resonates, if you wish, in order not to complicate things too much, to its own note, to its own
frequency.

這就是迴響的儀器,它並沒有針對任何東西迴響,它只是對著自己的音調迴響,對著自己的頻率迴響。以免事情變得複雜化。

This leads us to a certain remark about the sort of resonator
that we are dealing with, I mean concretely, in the sensory
apparatus in question, our ear: to a resonator which is not an indifferent one, to a resonator which is a kind of tube.

這導致我們到達某一個談論,關於我們正在處理的這種迴響器。我具體地指的是我們的耳朵,在我們討論的感官的儀器上。我們的耳朵並不是一個漠不關心的迴響器,不是僅是一種管狀的迴響器。

The distance of the journey involved in a certain return that the vibration makes, always carried from the oval window, passing from the scala tympani to the scala vestibuli, appears to be closely linked to the length of the space travelled in a closed conduit.

這個旅行的距離牽涉到某種振動的回轉,總是從卵形的窗戶傳遞出來,從耳朵鱗狀的定音鼓,到鱗狀的耳朵的前庭。它似乎跟它在封閉的導體裏旅行過的空間的長度息息相關。

It operates therefore in the same way, if you wish, as
some tube, whatever it may be, a flute or an organ.

它因此以相同的方式運作,作為某種的管子,無論那是什麼管子,笛子或是風琴。

(9) Obviously the matter is complicated, this apparatus does not resemble any other musical instrument. It is a tube which could be, as I might say, a tube with keys, in this sense that it seems that it is the cell put in the position of a cord, but which does not function like a cord, which is involved at the point of the return of the wave, which takes charge of connoting the resonance involved.

顯而易見的,這件事情很複雜。這個儀器並沒有類似任何的音樂樂器。它是一個管子,我不妨說,一個具有音鍵的管子。意思是,似乎就是這個聲音的細胞被放置在一條聲帶的位置上,但是它又沒有充當音帶的功用,因為這會牽涉到這個音波動回轉的這個點。聲波負責指明牽涉到的迴響。

I apologise all the more for this detour because it is quite
certain that it is not in this direction that we will find the last word on the matter. This reminder is all the same designed to actualise the fact that in the form, the organic form, there is something which appears to us akin to these primary, topological, transpatial data which made us interest ourselves very especially in the most elementary form of the created or creative constitution of a void, the one that we have incarnated in the form of an apologetic for you in the story of the pot.

對於這樣的迂迴離題,我甚感抱歉,因為這是確定的,我們會發現對於這件事情的結論,並不是朝著這個方向。我的提醒仍然是被設計要清楚表達這個事實:在這個形式,生命有機體的形式,我們覺得有某件東西,類似這些初級的拓樸地形的跨越空間的資料。這些資料使我們特別感到興趣:一個被創造及具有創造力的空無的形成,呈現的最基本的形式。這個空無,我曾經以空壺的故事作為比喻,具體表達過。

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

Anxiety 248 Jacques Lacan

January 26, 2011

Anxiety 248

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
5.6.63 XXI 247
Seminar 21: Wednesday 5 June 1963

A big presumption that we risk very little by engaging ourselves in a formalisation which is imposed as also being necessary* But this relationship of S to O, must indeed be situated as going far beyond in its complexity, which is nevertheless so simple, inaugural, what those who bequeathed to us the definition of the signifier believed it to be their duty to pose at the beginning of the operation they organise, namely the notion of communication.

這個假設未免荒誕:我們若是從事於賦加在我們身上的正式化,而且也是必需要的正式化,我們所冒的險最少。但是生命主體跟客體的關係,確實必須定位為,遠超越它本身的複雜性。這個超越是如此的簡單,如此的創始,以致那些傳予我們這個意符定義的那些人,相信這是他們的責任,在他們組織的運作的開始,提出溝通的這個觀念。

Communication as such is not what is primal since, at the origin S has nothing to communicate for the reason that all the instruments of communication are on the other side, in the field of the Other, and because he has to receive them
from him. As I have always said, this has as a result and
consequence that it is always principally from the Other that he receives his own message, the first emergence, the one which is inscribed on the board is only an unconscious, because
unformulatable, “Who am 1?”, to which there responds before it is formulated, a “You are”, namely that he receives first of all his own message in an inverted form, as I have said for a long time.

溝通的本身並不是原初所具有,因為在起源處,生命的主體並沒有什麼可溝通。理由是,所有的溝通的工具都在另外一邊,在大它者的領域,因為他必須從他接受它們。如我總是說,結果總是主要是從大它者,他接受他的訊息,第一次的出現,被銘記在黑板上的這個出現,只是一個無意識,因為它無法被說明。「我是誰?」在這個問題被說明之前,回應著一個「你存在」。換句話說,他首先接收他自己的訊息,以一個倒轉的形式,如我長久以來所說的。

I am adding today if you understand it, that he receives it in a form that is at first interrupted, that he hears first of all a “You are…” without attribution. And, nevertheless, however interrupted this message may be and therefore however
insufficient, it is never unformed, starting from this fact that language exists in the real, that it is on a journey, in circulation, and that for its part the S, in its supposedly
primal interrogation, that with regard to it, many things in this language are already regulated.

我今天補充說,假如你們瞭解它,他接收它,以首先被中斷的形式。他首先聽到一個為沒有屬性的「你存在為、、、」。可是,這個訊息無論如何被中斷,因此無論如何的不充足,它從來不是沒有形體,從這個事實開始,語言存在於真實界,它處於旅行途中,處於流通中。就它本身而言,這個生命的主體,在它被認為的原初的質問,關於它,這個語言的許多事情,已經被規範。

Now to take up a phrase I used earlier, it is not simply by
hypothesis, a hypothesis that I founded in our very own practice, identifying it with this praxis and up to its limits, to take this phrase up again, I would say that observable facts – and why so badly observed, this is the major question that experience presents to us – observable facts show us the autonomous operation of the word as it is presupposed in this schema.

現在我採用我先前使用過的一個詞語,那不僅是作為假設,一個我創建的假設,在我們的做法當中,認同這個現實界,推到極限。容我再一次採用這個詞語,我想要說,可觀察到的事實,(為什麼如此迫切地被觀察,這是精神分析經驗呈現給於我們的主要問題,)這些可觀察到事實給我們顯示文字的自動的運作,如同它在這個基模預先被假設。

I think that there are here enough mothers not afflicted with
deafness to know that a very small child, at the age when the
mirror phase is far from having finished its work, that a very
small child, once he has a few words, monologues before he goes to sleep.

我認為,在此有足夠多的母親深感痛苦,由於無法知道,當一個小孩的年紀,處於鏡像時期根本沒有完成它的工作,每個小孩,一但他擁有一些話,他會喃喃獨白一陣子,才會入睡。

Time prevents me today from reading for you a big page. I
promise you something satisfying from it the next time or the one after that; for undoubtedly I will not fail to do it. As luck would have it, after my friend Roman Jakobson had for ten years begged all his pupils to put a tape recorder in the nursery, it only happened two or three years ago. Thanks to this, we finally have a publication of one of those primordial monologues, and I repeat that you will get some satisfaction from it.

今天因為時間關係,我無法跟你們閱讀這一大頁。我承諾下一次,或下下次的演講,我會從那裏,給予你們某件令人滿意的東西。無可置疑的,我將一定會做到。幸運地,我的朋友羅門、傑克遜兩年來,曾經要求所有他的學生,在嬰兒房放置一台答錄機。它僅是在兩三年前才發生的事情。由於這樣,我們最後擁有被出版的那些原初的喃喃獨白。我重複一遍,你們會從那裏獲得滿意。

If I make you wait a little, it is because, in truth, it is useful for showing you a lot of other things that I want to outline today.

假如我讓你們等一下子,事實上,那是因為這是很有用的,給你們顯示其他的事情,我今天要描繪出輪廓。

It is necessary all the same for what I have to outline today, to evoke the references of existence, as regards which the fact that I can only do so without knowing too much about what may (7) correspond to it in your own knowledge, shows the degree to which we are fated to move around in a field in which, whatever one thinks about it and whatever expense in terms of courses and conferences about it are made, your education is nothing less than adequate.

這仍然是需要,因為我今天必須描繪出輪廓的內容,為了召喚存在的指稱。關於這個存在的指稱,我只能夠這樣做,雖然根據你們自己的知識,對於是什麼在呼應它,我所知不多。這個事實顯示出,我們會註定要在一個領域裏胡亂移動到什麼程度。不管我們對它怎麼看法,以舉行課程或是討論會的方法,花費多少的代價,你們所受到教育永遠無法是足夠。

In any case, if some people here remember what Piaget calls
egocentric language, to which I do not know whether we will be able to return this year – I think that you know what it is and that under a name that is perhaps defensible, but is undoubtedly open to all sorts of misunderstandings – there is for example, this characteristic that egocentric language, namely these sorts of monologues a child carries on aloud, when he is set to a common task with some comrades, which is very obviously a monologue directed at himself, can only be produced precisely in a certain community.

無論如何,假如在此某些人還記得皮亞傑所謂的自我中心的語言。我不知道今年我們是否能夠回到這個議題。(我認為你們知道那是什麼?它的名稱是能夠自圓其說,但是無可置疑的,它承受各種的誤解。)例如,自我中心的語言的這個特性,換句話說,一個小孩大聲說出的這些獨白,當他被指定跟某些的同伴從事一個共同的工作。顯而易見的,這個獨白朝向他自己,確實只有在某些的社會情境裏,才會被產生。

This is not to object to the qualification of egocentric, if one specifies the meaning of this “egocentric” – in any case, as regards egocentrism, it may appear striking that the subject as enunciated is so often elided in it. I recall this reference, it is perhaps to encourage you to make contact again and get to know the phenomenon in the text of Piaget for any useful end it may have in the future, but also to note that at least a problem is posed: that of situating, of knowing what is this hypnopompic monologue, which is quite primal compared to this manifestation, as you know, of a much later stage.

這並不是要反對自我中心的觀念是否有資格成立,假如我們指明這個「自我中心」動意義。無論如何,關於自我中心主義,耐人尋味的是,如此被表達的生命的主體,在表達中自己迷失不見。我提醒這個指稱,可能是要鼓勵你們再一次從事連繫,從皮亞傑的文本裏,去認識這個現象,有朝一人你們將會應用到它。但是你們也要注意到,至少,有一個問題被提出:定位的問題,也就是要知道這個睡後發生的獨白是什麼?眾所周知,跟較晚期的獨白展示比較起來,這時的獨白是相當原初的獨白。

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

Anxiety 247 Jacques Lacan

January 25, 2011

Anxiety 247

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
5.6.63 XXI 247
Seminar 21: Wednesday 5 June 1963

This is the reason why it was not by chance that I introduced the field of the eye hidden behind every spatial universe, with a reference to these beings-images on the encounter with whom there is played out a certain path of salvation, specifically the Buddhist path, by introducing the one that I designated for you as Kuan Yin or in other words Avalokitesvara with its complete sexual ambiguity. The more the Avalokitecvara is presentified as male, the more it takes on female aspects. I will show you, if that amuses you, some other day the images of Tibetan paintings or statues, there is a superabundance of them and the trait that I designated for you is absolutely obvious here.

這就是這個理由,為什麼我介紹隱藏在空間的宇宙背後的眼睛這個領域,並非是偶然。我提到這些生物的意象,當他們遭遇的某種救贖的途徑演出的人,明確地說,就是佛陀的途徑,我介紹我跟你們指明的「觀音」。換句話說,「觀世音菩薩」以及它的完全性的曖昧。觀世音菩薩越被呈現當著是男性,它就越顯現出女性的面貌。假如你們感到興趣,改天,我將會給你們顯示西藏圖像或佛像的意象,那真是汗牛充棟。我跟你們指示的這個特徵,在此絕對是顯而易見的。

What is at stake today is to grasp how this alternative between desire and jouissance can find its way. The difference between
dialectical thinking and our experience, is that we do not
believe in the synthesis. If there is a way through where the
antinomy is closed off, it is because it was already there before the constitution of the antinomy.

今天岌岌可危的是要理解,欲望與歡爽之間的這個選擇,能夠找到自己的途徑。在辯證思維與我們精神分析的經驗之間的差異是,我們並不相信這個正反合的「綜合」。假如有有一個方法,透過那裏,二律悖反能夠被封閉,那是因為在二律悖反的形成之前,它已經先存在。

For the object o, in which the impasse of the access from desire
to the thing is incarnated, to give him passage, it is necessary
to return to the beginning; there is nothing which prepares this passage before the capture of desire in specular space, there is no way out. For let us not omit to say that the possibility of this very impasse is linked to a moment which anticipates and conditions what has come to be marked in the sexual failure of man.

為了讓這個客體給他通過,我們必須回答開始的地發。在客體裏,從欲望接近被具體表現的東西,會形成僵局。沒有一樣東西替這個通過做準備,在欲望被捕捉在魅影的空間,並沒有出口。讓我們不要忽略地說,這個僵局的可能性,跟這個時刻息息相關。這個時刻預期並制約男人的性的失敗所被標示的東西。

It is the bringing into play of the specular tension which
eroticises so precociously and so profoundly the field of
insight.

這就是魅影緊張的運作,如此早熟而深刻地使洞見的領域性愛化。

(5) What is outlined in the anthropoid about the conductive
character of this field has been known since Kohler; that he is not without intelligence, because he can do a lot of things
provided he can see what he has to reach.

關於這個領域的導致的特性,在類人的動物所被描繪的輪廓,自從科勒爾以來就為人所知。他並不是沒有智慧,因為他能夠做許多的事情,只要他能夠看出他必須到達什麼。

I alluded last night to the fact that this is the whole point, it is not that the primate is any more incapable of speaking than ourselves, but he cannot make his word enter into this
operational field. But that is not the only difference. The
difference, marked by the fact that for the animal there is no mirror stage, is what has gone under the name of narcissism, from a certain ubiquitous subtraction of libido, from an injection of the libido into the field of insight, of which specularised vision gives the form. But this form hides from us the phenomenon of the occultation of the eye, which henceforth ought to look from everywhere at the one that we are, with the universality of sight.

昨天晚上,我提到這個事實,這是整個要點:靈長類動物,並非無法像我們人類一樣說話,但是他無法使他的話進入這個運作的領域。但是那並不是唯一的不同。另外的不同是,對於動物而言,從鏡像階段並不存在這個事實所標示出來:以自戀的名義,他所經歷過的,從力比多的無所不在的扣減,從力比多注入洞見的領域。這個洞見的魅影化的視覺,產生這個形式。但是這個形式隱藏不讓我們看見眼睛的隱匿的現象。因此,眼睛應該從每個地方看見我們存在的東西,由於視覺的無所不在。

We know that this can happen and it is what is called the
Unheimlich, but very particular circumstances are necessary.
Usually, what is satisfying precisely in the specular form is the masking of the possibility of this apparition. In other words, the eye establishes the fundamental relationship of the desirable in the fact that it always tends to make it miscognised, in the relationship to the other, that under this desirable there is a desirer.

我們知道,這件事會發生,那就是我們所謂的「怪異」,但是非常特別的環境是需要的。通常,確實就在這個魅影的形式,令人滿意的東西,就是魅影可能性的遮蔽。換句話說,眼睛建立可欲物的基本的關係。它總是使它被人誤認,在於它跟大它者的關係,在這個可欲物之下,有一個欲望者。

Let us reflect a little on the import of this formula which I believe I can give as being the most general one of what
constitutes the arousal of the Unheimlich. Imagine that you are dealing with the most relaxing of desirable things, in its most pacifying form, the divine statue which is only divine.

讓我們稍微反思一下這個公式的意義。我相信我能夠給予這個公式,當著是最一般性的使用,組成「怪異感」到喚起。想像一下,你們正在處理這些可欲物的最令人輕鬆的地方,以最令人撫慰的方式,只屬於神祗的神像。

What would be more Unheimlich than to see it coming to life, namely to see it showing itself as desiring!

有什麼比看到神祗復活更加怪異的事情?煥句話說,看到神祗顯示自己,表示欲望?

Now, not alone is it the structuring hypothesis that we pose for the genesis of o that it is born elsewhere and before this,
before this capture which hides it, it is not simply this
hypothesis, itself founded on our praxis, it is of course from
this that I introduce it: (1) either our praxis is faulty, I mean faulty with respect to itself; or (2) it supposes that our field, which is that of desire, is engendered from this relationship of S to 0 which is the one in which we cannot rediscover what is our goal except in the measure that we reproduce its terms.

現在,不僅它是這個結構的假設,我們提出這個假設作為客體的創世紀。客體出生在別的地方,在此之前,在隱藏它的這個捕捉之前。不僅是這個假設,它本身被建立在我們的現實界之上,我當然也是從這裏介紹它:要不就是我們的現實界是錯誤的,我是指關於它本身的錯誤。要不然就是,它假定我們的領域,欲望的領域,是從這生命的主體跟客體的關係所產生。在這個客體裏,我們無法重新發現我們的目標是什麼,除了以我們複製它的術語的方式。

Either our praxis is faulty with respect to itself or it presupposes (6) this. What our praxis engenders, if you wish, is this universe here, symbolised here in the final term in the famous division which has been guiding us for some time through the three phases in which the subject S that is still unknown has to constitute himself in the Other, and in which the o appears as the remainder of this operation.

要不就是我們的現實界,關於本身是錯誤的,要不是就是它預先假定這個客體。我們的現實界所產生的。是在此的這個宇宙。這個宇宙在此被象徵,用這個最後的術語,在著名的區分。這個區分一直在引導我們有一段時間,透過三個階段。在這三個階段裏,依舊不被知道的生命的主體,必須組成他自己,在大它者的身上。在那裏,這個客體出現,作為運作的殘餘物。

I would point out to you in passing that the alternative: either
our praxis is faulty or it presupposes this, is not an exclusive
alternative. Our praxis can allow itself to be faulty in part
with respect to itself, and that there should be a residue since precisely this is what is predicted.

我將順便跟你們指出這個替代選擇:要不就是我們的現實界是錯誤的,要不然就是它預先假定這個:這並不是一個專有的替代選擇。我們的現實界能夠容許它自己部份是錯誤的,關於它自己。既然這確實是可被預測的內容,那應該是會有一個殘渣存在。

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

Anxiety 246 Jacques Lacan

January 24, 2011

Anxiety 246

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
5.6.63 XXI 247
Seminar 21: Wednesday 5 June 1963

That the phallus is not found where it is expected, where it is required, namely on the plane of genital mediation, is what
explains that anxiety is the truth of sexuality, namely what
appears every time its flow retreats, runs into the sand.
Castration is the price of this structure, it substitutes itself for this crutch. But in truth, this is an illusory game; there is no castration because, at the place where it has to happen, there is no object to castrate. For that, it would be necessary for the phallus to be there. But it is only there so that there will be no anxiety.

陽具並沒有在它被期望的地方,在它被要求的地方被找到,換句話說,在作為性器官仲介的地方。這個理由解釋了為什麼焦慮是性愛的真理。換句話說,這就是每一次高潮退縮,潛入沙灘時發生的狀況。閹割就是這個結構的代價,它代替自己充當這個支撐。但是事實上,這是一種幻見的遊戲。閹割並不存在,因為在它必須發生的地方,並沒有客體可以閹割。假如是那樣,陽具必須是在那裏。但是只有在那裏,焦慮才不會存在。

The phallus, where it is expected as sexual, never appears except as lack, and this is its link with anxiety. And all of this means that the phallus is called on to function as an instrument of potency. Now potency, I mean what we are speaking about when we speak about potency, when we speak about it in a fashion which vacillates about what is involved – for it is always to omnipotence that we refer ourselves; now that is not what is involved, omnipotence is already the slippage, the evasion with respect to this point at which all potency fails – one does not demand potency to be everywhere, one demands it to be where it is present.

在性愛時被期待的陽具,從來沒有出現,除了作為一個欠缺。這就是它跟焦慮息息相關的原因。這一切都意味著,陽具被召喚充當力量的一種工具的功用。這種力量,我是指,我們正在談論的力量,當我們談論到力量,當我們談論到它時,我們對於牽涉的內容搖擺不定。我們提到自己總是當著是無所不能。既然這並不是所被牽涉到內容,無所不能已經被大打折扣,溜之大吉,關於所有的力量都會失敗的這一點。我們並不要求處處都有力量,我們只要求在它出現的地方要有力量。

It is precisely, because it fails where it is expected,
(3) that we begin to foment omnipotence. In other words: the
phallus is present, it is present everywhere it is not up to it.

確實地,因為它在它被期待的地方失敗,我們開始激發無所不能。換句話說,陽具是存在的,它處處存在,只是身不由己。

For it is the aspect which allows us to pierce this illusion of the claim engendered by castration, in so far as it covers the anxiety presentified by every actualisation of jouissance; it is this confusion between jouissance and the instruments of potency.

就是這一面,容許我們刺穿由閹割產生的宣稱擁有的這個幻見。它掩蓋了歡爽的徹底實現所具體顯現的焦慮。這就是處於歡爽與力量的工具之間的混淆。

Human impotence, with the progress of institutions, becomes
better than this state of fundamental misery where it constitutes itself into a profession, I mean a profession in every sense of the word, from the sense of the profession of faith, up to the term, to the aim that we find in the professional ideal.

人類的無能為力,隨著體制的進步,變得比基本的悲慘的這個狀態更加嚴重。在體制那裏,人類的無能為力形成一種專業,我的意思是「專業」這個術語本身的意義,從信心的專業,到術語的專業,到我們在專業的理想找到目標。

Everything that shelters behind the dignity of any profession, is always this central lack which is impotence. Impotence, as one might say, in its most general formula, is what destined man to be only able to orgasm (jouir) from his relationship to the support of (+

). This (jP) therefore, for both sexes, is what I desire and what I can only have qua ( – j p) .

這是一種理念式的愛情,陽具作為「負減陽具」的基本的仲介的具體呈現。因此,對於兩性而言,這是我作為「負減陽具」所渴望及所能擁有的東西。

It is (4) this minus which is found, in the field of sexual
conjunction, to be the universal third term, to be this ego, my dear Reboul, which is not at all the reciprocal Hegelian one, but in so far as it constitutes the field of the Other as lack, I only accede to in so far as I take this very path, that I attach myself to the fact that this “I” makes me disappear, that I only rediscover myself in what Hegel perceived of course, but which he justifies without this interval, only in a generalised o, only in this idea of the ego in so far as it is everywhere, namely in so far as it is nowhere.

就是這種「負減」,在性的結合點這個領域,被發現是這個普遍的第三術語,這個自我。親愛的聽眾,這個自我,根本不是黑格爾所說的與人互惠的自我。它形成大它者作為欠缺的這個領域,我只有採取這條研究途徑,我才能夠同意。我堅持這個事實:這個「我」使我消失,我當然只能在黑格爾感覺的內涵裏,重新發現我自己,但是他證實這個「我」,中間沒有間隔,只是以一個概念化的客體,只是在這個自我的理念裏。表面上,這個「我」處處都在,實際上,處處不在。

The support of desire is not designed for sexual union; for generalised, it does not specify me more as a man or a woman, but as one or the other.

欲望的支持並不是為了性的結合而設計。概念化來說,它並沒有標明我,作為一個男人或是女人,而僅是標明我作為這個人,或是那個人。

The function of this field described here as that of sexual union, poses for each of the two sexes the alternative: the other is either the other or the phallus in the sense of exclusion. This field here is empty, but this field here, if I make it positive, the “or” takes on this other meaning which means that one is substitutable for the other at every moment.

在此被描述為性的結合,這個領域的功用,對於兩性的每一位元,都會形成這個選擇:大它者要就是這個大它者,要不然就是具有排除意義的陽具。在此的這個領域是空無,但是在此的這個領域,假如我使它積極運作,這個「或者」會具有這個其他的意義。這意味著,隨時我們都可以被更換成為這個大它者。

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

Anxiety 245 Jacques Lacan

January 24, 2011

Anxiety 245

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
5.6.63 XXI 247
Seminar 21: Wednesday 5 June 1963

And (13) it is this that – I would ask you to refer to my old
seminars – this is what I thought it worth while valorising by underlining, after Joan Riviere, the correct function of what she calls “Womanliness as masquerade”. She has simply to forget about her jouissance.

就是這個,(我想要你們參照一下我以前的講座,)這就是我認為很值得推崇的東西。跟隨在瓊恩、瑞比銳之後,我強調這個正確的功用,她所謂的「女性的假面」。她就是忘記了她的歡爽。

In the measure that we leave her in a way on this path, we find ourselves signing the decree of the renewal of the phallic
claim, which becomes, I would not say the compensation, but as it were the hostage of what one demands from her in fact for taking charge of the failure of the other.

當我們用某種方式將她留在這條研究途徑,我們發現我們自己簽下陽具所有權宣稱的更新的命令。這種宣稱,我姑且不說是成為這種的心理補償,而是成為人質抵押品。事實上,我們對於她的要求,要求她負責大它者的失敗。

Such are the paths on which there are presented, in considering
the genital plane, genital realisation as a term, what we could
call the impasses of desire, if there were not the opening up of anxiety. We will see, restarting from the point that today I have led you to, how the whole analytic experience shows us that it is in the measure that it is summoned as object of propitiation in a failed conjunction, that the phallus which proves to be missing, constitutes castration itself as a point that it is impossible to get round in the relationships of the subject to the Other, and as a point that has been resolved as regards its anxiety function.

當我們從性器官的層面來考慮,這些研究的途徑就是這樣。在這些研究的途徑,性器官的滿足作為一個術語,我們所謂的欲望的僵局,假如沒有焦慮的敞開。我們將會看出,重新從今天我引導你們的這一點開始,整個的精神分析經驗如何跟我們顯示,它被召喚作為補償的客體,在一個失敗的結合。陽具證明是漏失的,它組成閹割的本身,作為我們不可能繞過的一個點,在生命的主體跟大它者的關係。作為一個已經被解決的點,關於焦慮的功用。

5.6.63 XXI 247
Seminar 21: Wednesday 5 June 1963

What I told you the last time ended, I believe, significantly
with the silence which greeted my remarks, no one it seems having preserved enough sangfroid to reward them with a little applause.

上一次我的演講結束時,我相信,非常重要的是,我的談論所受到接待是沉默。似乎沒有人曾經保持足夠的冷靜,稍微給予一點鼓勵的掌聲。

Either I am wrong or perhaps after all it is not too much to see in this the result of what I had expressly announced in beginning these remarks, namely that it was not possible to tackle castration anxiety head on without provoking, let us say, some echo of it.

要就是我錯了,要不然就是,畢竟這並不算是太過份,從這裏看出這個結果,當我開始這些談論,激動地宣佈的結果。換句話說,要正面克服閹割的焦慮,而不引起某些的反彈是不可能的,容我們這樣說。

And after all this is not an excessive pretension, since what I told you is, if fact, something that could be qualified as not very encouraging, because it concerned the union between man and woman, an ever-present problem all the same, and one that quite correctly always has, and I hope that it still finds, a place in the preoccupations of psychoanalysts.

畢竟,這並不是一個過份的偽裝。事實上,我所告訴你們的,是某件東西,能夠有資格充當時具有鼓勵性的東西。因為它關係到男女之間的結合,以及始終存在的難題。正確地說,其中一個難題在精神分析師的專注研究裏,佔有一席之地。我希望現在它仍然發現是舉足輕重。

Jones circled for a long time around this problem materialised, incarnated by what is supposed to be implied in the
phallo-centric perspective of primal ignorance, not only of man, but of woman herself, about the locus of conjunction, the vagina.

長久以來,瓊尼斯就專注研究這個難題,以陽具為中心的原初的無知的觀點,具體所表現的東西,不但對於男人,而且對於女人,關於性的媾合的軌跡,陰戶的軌跡。

And all the partly fruitful, even though incomplete detours that Jones went into on this path, show very well their aim in what he invokes – as I recalled for you at one stage – the famous “Man and woman he created them” which moreover is so ambiguous.

在所有的部份成果之後,即使是不完整的迂迴,瓊尼斯在這條研究途徑所進入的,顯現得很清楚,他們的目標,在他所召喚的,(如同我在某一個階段跟你們提醒,)著名的「他創造他們的男人與女人」。而且,語義很曖昧。

For after all – one is entitled to say – Jones did not meditate on the Hebrew text of this verse 27 of Book 1 of Genesis.

畢竟,(我們有資格這樣說,)鐘斯並沒有沉思希伯來文的文本,創世紀第一章第27詩篇。

In any case, to try to support what I said the last time on my little schema constructed by using these Euler circles, this could be supported as follows: the field opened up by man and woman in what one could call, in the biblical sense, their knowledge of one another, only intersects because the zone in which they could effectively overlap, where their desires carry them to reach one another, is qualified by the lack of that which would be their middle term, the phallus.

無論如何,設法去支持我上一次所說的,關於我使用「費爾巴哈的三角形的九點圓圈」,建構的小小的基模。它能夠被支持如下:男人跟女人展開的領域,從聖經的意義來說,在我所謂的彼此之間的認識,它們之所以能夠交會,是因為這個地區,在它們能夠有效地重疊的地區,在那裏,他們的欲望引導他們互相接近,是因為他們的這個中間術語,這個陽具,給予他們的資格。

For each of them, it is that which, when it is attained,
alienates it precisely from the other.

對於其中每一個而言,當它被獲得時,這就是會使它確實跟大它者疏離。

The woman can undoubtedly be the symbol of the man, in his desire for phallic omnipotence, and precisely in so far as she is no longer the woman. As regards the woman, it is quite clear through all that we have discovered, what we have called
Penisneid, that she can only take the phallus for what it is not, (2) namely either o the object, or her own too small (jp) , which only gives her a jouissance approximating to what she imagines is the jouissance of the other, which she can no doubt share through a sort of mental phantasy, but only by straying from her own jouissance.

無可置疑的,女人會是男人的象徵,在他對於陽具無所不能的欲望。關於這個女人,這是顯而易見的,透過我們曾經發現的東西,我們稱為的陽具羡慕,她只能夠將陽具充當是它本質所沒有的東西。換句話是,要就是這個客體,要不就是她自己的太小的「負減陽具」,只能給她一種歡爽,接近她所想像的大它者的歡爽。無可置疑的,她能夠分享這個大它者的歡爽,透過一種精神上的幻見。但是這種幻見,會飄離她自己的歡爽。

In other words, she can only enjoy (&) because it is not at its place, at the place of her jouissance, where her jouissance can be realised. I am going to give you a little illustration of it that is a little controversial, somewhat marginal, but
contemporary. In an audience like this, how often, do we
analysts, how often, to the point that it becomes something
constant in our practice, do women want to be analysed like their husbands, and often by the same psychoanalyst? What does that mean, if not that the supposedly rewarded desire of their husband which they have the ambition to share, the – ( – (P) the
re-positiving of (<p) that they suppose operates in the analytic field, this is what they have the ambition to attain.

換句話說,她只能夠享受,因為它並沒有在它的位置上,在她的歡爽的位置上。在那裏,她的歡爽能夠被實現。我正要給予你們一個小小的例子說明。這個例子有點具有爭議性,有點邊緣性,但是蠻現代的。在像這樣的觀眾,有多少次,我們精神分析師,有多少次,到達這一點,它變成某件我們常規的做法。女人想要像他們丈夫那樣被精神分析嗎?時常被相同的精神分析師嗎?那是什麼意思?那難道不是她們有這個企圖心,想要分享丈夫所被認為被給予的酬勞嗎?這個「負減陽具」,這個「負減陽具」的重新激發,他們認為在精神分析的領域所運作的。這就是他們企圖想要獲得的東西。

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

Anxiety 244 Jacques Lacan

January 24, 2011

Anxiety 244

 

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

 

If we let go of this ideal of genital achievement, by seeing what is structurally, happily alluring in it, there is no reason why the anxiety linked to castration should not appear to us in a much more supple correlation with its symbolic object, and with an opening out that is quite different to the objects of other levels, as this moreover has always been implied by the premises (11) of Freudian theory, which put desire in a completely different relationship to a purely and simply natural one to the natural partner as regards its structuring.

 

假如我們捨棄性的成就這個理想,憑藉著看出它的結構性,看出它迷惑誘人的道理,我們沒有理由不覺悟到,跟閹割相關的焦慮,跟它的意符客體,跟不同於其他層次的客體的開放,具有更彈性的相互關係。而且,佛洛伊德的假設總是已經暗示這一點。他將欲望放置于一個完全不同的關係,完全不同於一個純粹及非常自然的關係,跟這個自然的伴侶,關於它的結構性。

 

I would like, to make you better sense what is at stake, to

recall all the same what is involved in what one might say are, at first, savage relationships between man and woman.

 

我想要讓你們更加能夠感覺到,岌岌可危的地方在哪里,仍然要提醒你們,我們不妨說,男女之間的野蠻關係,起初會牽涉到什麼。

 

After all, a woman who does not know whom she is dealing with, it is indeed, in accordance with what I put forward to you about the relationship between anxiety and the desire of the Other, because she is not before the man without a certain unease about where exactly this path of desire is going to lead her.

 

畢竟,女人並不知道,她正在跟誰打交道。確實是如此,為了要符合我跟你們提出的,關於焦慮與對於大它者的欲望之間的關係。因為她在男人的面前,並不是沒有某些的不安,關於欲望的這條途徑將會引導她到哪里。

 

When the man, by God, makes love like everyone else and is disarmed, if the woman – something which as you know is very conceivable – does not draw, I would say, any obvious profit from it, there is in every case something that she has gained, it is that she is henceforth altogether at ease about the intentions of her partner.

 

我的天,當男人像每一位其他的人做愛,並且被解除防衛,假如女人,(眾所皆知,這是不可思議的東西,)並沒有從做愛獲得任何顯而易見的利益,我是說,無論如何,她會獲得某件東西,因此她會完全安逸自在于他的伴侶的意圖。

 

In the same chapter of The Wasteland, by T S Elliot, to which I referred on a particular day when I thought it well to confront with our experience the old theory about the superiority of woman on the plane of jouissance, the one in which T S Elliot allows Tiresias to speak, we find these verses – whose irony made it always seem to me that they ought one day to have their place here in our discourse – when the carbuncular young dandy, the little clerk from the building society, has finished with the typist whose surroundings are all along depicted for us, has finished his little affair, T S Elliot expresses himself as follows:

 

在英國詩人艾略特的「荒原」的相同章節,在特別的一天,我提到它,當我想到它很適合用來面對我們的經驗,在歡爽的層次,女人優越于男人的古老理論。在這首長詩裏,艾略特讓提瑞西阿斯道出,我們發現這些詩,(內容的反諷,總是使我覺得,有朝一日,在我們的真理的論述,它們應該具有一席之地。)當風流倜儻的花花公子,這位來自建築工會的小職員,跟這位打字員辦完事,這位打字員的背景,他一直跟我們描述。當他辦完他的做愛情事後,艾略特這樣跟我們表達如下:

 

“When lovely woman stoops to folly and Paces about her room again, alone, She smooths her hair with automatic hand,

And puts a record on the gramophone.”

 

「當這位可愛的女人屈身于愚行,再一次在她的房間踱步,孤單地。她不自覺地用手撫平她的頭髮,然後放一張唱片在留聲機上。」

 

What is meant by: “When lovely woman stoops to folly”, is not to be translated, it is a song from the Vicar of Wakefield, when a beautiful woman abandons herself to folly – “stoops” is not the same thing as “s’abandonne” – lowers herself to folly, and then finally finds herself alone, she strides across the room stroking her hair automatically with her hand, and changes the record.

 

這是什麼意思?「當這位可愛的女人屈身于愚行,」我們無法翻譯。那是一首歌,從「威克菲爾牧師」小說裏的一首歌,當一位美麗的女人放縱于愚行,(「屈身於」跟「放縱」並不是相同的事情,)她紆尊降貴於愚行,然後發現她自己孤單,她在房間高視闊步,不自覺地用手撫平她的頭髮,然後更換唱片。

 

This by way of response to the question my pupils were posing

amongst themselves about what is involved in the question of the desire of the woman. The desire of the woman is determined by (12) the question, for her also, of her jouissance. The fact that she is not simply much closer than man to jouissance, but doubly determined by it, is something that analytic theory has always taught us.

 

藉著回答我的學生他們自己提出的這個問題,關於女人的欲望所牽涉到的問題。女人的欲望,不但被歡爽的這個問題所決定,而且雙重地被決定。這是某件精神分析師的理論總是教導我們的。

 

That the locus of this jouissance is linked for us to the enigmatic, unsituatable character of her orgasm, is something that our analyses have been able to take far enough for us to be able to say that this locus is a rather archaic point since it is older than the present separation of the cloaca, something that was perfectly well located from a certain analytic perspective by a particular analyst of the female sex.

 

對於我們而言,這個歡爽的軌跡,跟這個謎團一般,無法找到位置的性高潮的特性息息相關。這是某件我們精神分析學一直在探究的事情,為了要能夠說:這個軌跡是一個相當過時的點,因為它比目前所謂的「胚胎泄殖腔」的分離,更加古老。從某種的精神分析的觀點,有一位對於女人的性,特別有研究的精神分析師,很清楚地找出它的位置。

 

That desire, which is not at all jouissance, is in her case

naturally where it ought to be according to nature, tubular

(tubaire) ■ is something that the desire of those we call

hysterics designates perfectly. The fact that we should have

classified these subjects as hysterics changes nothing in the

fact that desire thus situated is true, is organically true.

 

就女人的情形而言,那個欲望,根本就不是歡爽,那是它自然應該所在的地方。依照自然,管狀物是我們所謂的歇斯底里症患者的欲望清楚指明的東西。我們本來應該將這些生命的主體分類為歇斯底里症患者,這個事實並沒有改變以下的事實:因此而被定位的欲望是真實,在器官上是真實。

 

It is because man will never carry the point of his desire to that extreme, that one can say that the jouissance of the man and of the woman are not organically conjoined. It is indeed in the measure of the failure of the desire of man that the woman is led, as I might say, normally to the idea of having the man’s organ, in so far as it is supposed to be a veritable amboceptor: this is what is called the phallus.

 

因為男人將永遠沒有辦法將他的欲望點貫徹到這個程度。我們能夠說,男人的歡爽跟女人的歡爽在器官方面並沒有共同結合。確實就是因為男人欲望的失敗,我們不妨這樣說,女人正常地被引導去獲得男人的器官的這個觀念,因為這個器官被認為是一個可驗證的雙重抗體:這就是所謂的陽具。

 

 

It is because the phallus does not realise, except in its evanescence, the meeting of desires, that it becomes the common locus of anxiety.

 

因為陽具並沒有實現欲望的會合,除了逐漸消腫,陽具就變成焦慮的軌跡。

 

What the woman demands from us analysts, at the end of an

analysis conducted in accordance with Freud, is no doubt the

penis, Penisneid, but in order to do better than the man.

 

依據佛洛伊德所主導的精神分析學,女人對於我們精神分析師所要求的,無可置疑是這個陰莖,陰莖羡慕,但是為了表現得比男人更好。

 

There is something, there are many things, there are a thousand things which confirm all of that.

 

有某件事情,有許多事情,有上千的事情,證實這一切。

 

Without analysis what is there for the woman as a way of overcoming this Penisneid, if we suppose it to be always implicit; we know it very well, it is the most ordinary mode of seduction between the sexes, it is to offer to the desire of man the object involved in phallic claims, the non-detumescent object to sustain his desire, it is to make of her feminine attributes the signs of the omnipotence of man.

 

假如沒有精神分析學,女人擁有什麼可以充當克服這個陰莖羡慕的方法呢?假如我們認為它總是暗示;我們心知肚明,這是兩性之間最普通的誘惑的模式。這是要給男人的欲望,提供牽涉到陽具宣稱的客體,這個非消腫的客體,來維持他的欲望。這是要用男人的無所不能的符號,來說明她的女性的屬性。

 

陳春雄譯

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

 

 



Anxiety 243 Jacques Lacan

January 23, 2011

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

Anxiety 242 Jacques Lacan

January 23, 2011

Anxiety 242

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

And in the text of the Wolfman things go even further, giving its true sense, the one that we have drowned under a wave of
moralising assumptions about oblativity, Freud speaks in this
connection about sacrifice, something which – you will admit – given Freud’s reading – for example, we know that he had read for example, Robertson Smith – that, when he spoke about sacrifice, he was not speaking about something up in the air, a kind of vague moral analogy, Freud speaks about sacrifice in connection with the apparition of this excremental object in the field.

在狼人的文本,事情探討得更加深入,給予它的真實的意義。這個意義,我們將它淹沒在有關分享禮物的道德化假設的波濤裏。關於犧牲奉獻,佛洛伊德提到某件事情,(你們會承認,假如你們閱讀佛洛伊德的文本。)例如,我們知道,他曾經閱讀,例如羅勃遜、史密斯的著作。當他談論關於犧牲奉獻,他並不是談論到虛無縹緲的事情,一種模糊的道德的類比。佛洛伊德談論到犧牲奉獻,關於在這個領域,這個糞便的客體的魅影。

After all that must mean something.

畢竟,那一定意味著某件事情。

It is here that we will take up the thing at the level, if you wish, of the normal act, of the act rightly or wrongly qualified as mature, that at the level of which I thought I could in my seminar before last, if I remember rightly, articulate orgasm as being the equivalent of anxiety and situating itself in the inner field of the subject, while I provisionally left castration with this single mark. It is quite obvious that one could not detach from it the sign of the intervention of the other as such; this characteristic in reality having always been, from the beginning, attributed to it, it is therefore the other who threatens castration.

在此,我們將以正常的演出的層次,來探討事情。這個演出無論是正確,或是錯誤,都具有成熟的資格。在這個層次,我認為我能夠在我上上一次的講座,假如我記得沒錯,我表達性高潮當作是焦慮的相等物,它的位置在生命主體的內在領域。我當時臨機一動,將閹割也給予這個單一定標記。顯而易見的,我們無法從閹割隔離大它者本身的介入。這個特性從一開始,實際上總是被歸屬於閹割。因此,是大它者威脅著閹割。

I pointed out in this connection that by assimilating, by making equivalent orgasm as such and anxiety, I was taking up the position which rejoined what I had previously said about anxiety as a reference, a signal of the only relationship which does not deceive, that we could find in it the reason for what could be satisfying in orgasm. It is from something that happens in the perspective in which it is confirmed that anxiety is not without an object, that we can understand the function of orgasm and more especially what I called “the satisfaction that it carries with it”.

關於這一點,我指出,憑藉著吸收,憑藉著使性高潮跟焦慮成為相等物,我採取這個立場。我重新加入我先去說過的內容,關於焦慮作為一種指稱,一個唯一沒有收到的關係的訊息,我們在裏面能夠找到這個理由,性高潮能夠讓人滿足的東西。從這個觀點所發生動某件事,在這個觀點裏,我們證實,焦慮並非沒有客體。我們能夠瞭解性高潮的這個功用。更特別的是,我所謂的「跟隨性高潮而來的滿足」。

I believed at that time that I could not say any more if I was to be understood. It nevertheless remains that an echo has come to me, let us say to put it mildly, of some perplexity in the terms that were interchanged, if this echo is correct, precisely in the case of two people that I believed I had formed particularly well.

當時我相信,我不能夠再多說了,假如我想要讓人瞭解。可是,仍然會有迴響來到我這裏。我們不妨溫和地說,在彼此交換的術語,困惑之感油然而生。假如這個迴響是正確的,確實在兩個人的個案裏,我相信我已經處理得很貼切。

It is all the more surprising that they could interrogate
themselves in this case about what I meant by this satisfaction. (8) Is what is involved then, they asked one another, jouissance?

更加令人驚奇的是,在這樣的情況,他們能夠質疑到我所謂的「滿足」是什麼意思。他們彼此問道:當時所牽涉到的是「歡爽」嗎?

Is it a way of returning in a certain fashion to this derisory
absolute that certain people want to put into genital fusion, so called?

它是一種方式,可以讓我們以某種方式回到這個可笑的絕對嗎?某些人想要將這個可笑的絕對,放進所謂的性愛交媾裏。

And then, since it was a matter of seeing the relationship between this anxiety point – put into this point all the ambiguity that you wish – a point where there is no longer anxiety if the orgasm covers it over, and this point of desire in so far as it is marked by the absence of the object o in the form of (-<P), what happens, they asked themselves to this relationship in the case of the woman?

然後,問題是要看出這個關係,處於這個焦慮點跟欲望點之間的關係。(一切你們希望的曖昧都被放進這個焦慮點,)在這一點,焦慮不再存在,因為性高潮將它全面覆蓋。欲望點則是被這個客體的欠缺所標示,以「負減陽具」的形式。當他們問及自己,在女人的案例的關係,會發生什麼事?

Answer: I did not say that the satisfaction of orgasm was identified with what I defined in the seminar on Ethics about the locus of jouissance. Answer – it even appears ironic to underline it-: the little satisfaction, even if it is sufficient, brought by orgasm, why should it be the same and at the same point as this other little which is offered to a woman even in a successful copulation? This is what should be articulated in the most precise fashion.

答案是:我並沒有說,性高潮的滿足相等於是,我在精神分析學的倫理的講座所定義的「歡爽的軌跡」。(這甚至有點反諷,我在此強調它。)答案是:性高潮所帶來的這點小小的滿足,即使它是充份的,它跟其他的這個小小的滿足,在成功的性愛交媾中,被提供給女人的滿足,為什麼應該是相同,處於相同點?這就是我們應該以最明確的方式來表達?

It is not enough to say vaguely that the satisfaction of orgasm is comparable to what I call elsewhere, on the oral plane, the crushing of demand under the satisfaction of need. At this oral level, the distinction between need and demand is easy to sustain, and besides does not fail to pose us the problem of where the drive is situated.

我們光是模糊地說,性高潮的滿足,類似我在其他地方所謂的,在口腔的層次,在需求的滿足下,要求會崩塌。在這個口腔的層次,需求跟要情的區別,很容易維持。除外,它一定會跟我們形成這個難題:驅力的位置在哪里?

If by some artifice one can equivocate at the oral level about what is original in the grounding of demand in what we analysts call drive, this is what we do not in any case have any right to do at the genital level. And precisely there where it would seem that we are dealing with the most primitive instinct, the sexual instinct, it is there less than anywhere else that we cannot fail to refer to the structure of the drive as being supported by the formula $<?D: $ relationship of desire to demand.

憑藉著某種的詭計,我們能夠在口腔的層次含糊其辭,關於什麼是原初的東西,作為要求的基礎,在我們精神分析師所謂的「驅力」。這是我們無論如何都沒有權利去做,在性器官的層次。確實就是在那裏,我們正在處理的最原初的本能,性的本能。確實在那裏,而不是其他的地方,我們一定會提到驅力的結構,作為被這個公式「$<?D」所支持:對於生命的主體,欲望跟要求的關係。

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