Desire 020 Jacques Lacan

Desire 020

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK VI
Desire and its Interpretation
欲望及其解釋
1958 – 1959

Seminar 3 ; 26 November 1958

I think that this is sufficient to show you this agency of the signifier, in so far as it is at the basis of the very structuring of a certain psychological field which is not the
totality of the psychological field, which is precisely this part of the psychological field which to a certain degree is by convention within what we can call psychology, to the degree that psychology is constituted on the basis of what I would call a
sort of unitary intentional or appetitive theory of the field.

我認為，跟你們顯示意符的這個代理，就很足夠了。因為它是某種心理學的領域的結構的基礎。它並不是心理學領域的整體性。確實就是這個心理學領域的這個部份，根據傳統，在某個程度，它屬於我們所謂的心理學。心理學組成的基礎，在某個程度是根據我所我的一種單一的意向及食欲的領域。

This presence of the signifier, is articulated, is articulated in an infinitely more insistent, infinitely more powerful, infinitely more efficacious way in the Freudian experience, and this is what Freud reminds us of at every instant, it is also (14) what tends to be forgotten in the most exceptional way, in so far as you want to make of analysis something which would go in the same direction, in the same sense as the one in which psychology has come to situate its interest, I mean in the sense of the clinical field, of an intentional field where the unconscious is supposed to be something like a kind of well, a borehole as one might say, parallel to the general evolution of psychology and which is also supposed to go by another way to the
level of these most elementary tensions, to the level of the depths, in so far as there occurs something more reduced to the vital, to the elementary aspect of what we see at the surface which is supposed to be the so-called field of the preconscious or the conscious.

意符的存在被表達，以一種更加持續、更加有力量，更加有效率的方式，在佛洛伊德的精神分析經驗裏。這就是為什麼佛洛伊德隨時提醒我們，那也是它會傾向於被忘記，以最特殊的方式。你們想要解釋精神分析學為某件會朝著相同方向的東西，以相同的意義，如同心理學定位它的興趣所在。我的意思是，臨床領域的所在，屬於意圖性的領域。在那裏，無意識被認為是某件像是一種井，一種鑽孔，我們不妨這樣說。跟心理學的一般進化相提並論。心理學也被認為要遵照某種的途徑，到達這些基本緊張的層次，到達這些深度的層次。有額外某件事情發生，被化簡成為我們看到的這個重要的，基本的方面，在這個被認為是所謂的意識的前意識到領域。

This, I repeat, is an error. It is very precisely in this sense that everything that we are saying takes on its value and its importance, and if some of you were able the last time to follow my advice and refer to the two articles which appeared in 1915,
what were you able to read there? You were able to read and to see the following: that if you refer for example to the article “Das Unbewusste”, the point which is most tangible in it, to the point I would say against which in a superficial description in
which it would be a question of something other than signifying elements, of things which those who understand absolutely nothing about what I am saying here, articulate and call every day an (15) intellectualist theory.

我重複一遍，這是個錯誤。確實就是以這種意義，每一件我們正在說的事情，形成它的價值及它的重要性。假如上一次你們有些人能夠遵照我的勸告，去參考出現在1915年的這兩篇文章，你們在那裏會閱讀到什麼？你們能夠閱讀而且看出以下：例如，假如你們參考這篇文章「無意識」，在裏面最具體的一點，到達我會說，以一個膚淺的描述，問題是某件不是意符因素的東西，對於我在此正在談論一無所知的那些人，會稱呼每一個，是一個知識份子的理論。

We will therefore go and put ourselves at the level of unconscious emotions, since Freud speaks about them, because of course it is naturally objected to all of this that instead of speaking about the signifier, this is not emotional life, this is not dynamic. I am of course far from wanting to contest this because it is to explain it in a clear
fashion that I take this route to the level of the Unbewusste.

因此，我們將會去將我們自己放置在無意識情感的層次，因為佛洛伊德談論有關它們。因為當然我們自然會反對所有以下的說法：非但沒有談論到意符，這並不是情感的生活，這也不是動力活動。當然，我絲毫並不想要爭辯，因為我想要解釋它，以一個清楚的方式。我採取這條途徑，到達無意識的層次。

What do you see Freud articulating for us? He articulates for us very exactly the following: it is the third part of “Das Unbewusste”; Freud explains the following very clearly, that the only thing that can be repressed, he tells us, is what is called
Vorstellunqsrepr’asentanz.

你們看到佛洛伊德跟我們表達什麼？他非常確實地跟我們表達以下：在「無意識」的第三部份，佛洛伊德非常清楚地解釋以下：他告訴我們，唯一能夠被壓抑的東西，就是所謂的「自由」。

It is only this, he tells us which can properly speaking be repressed. This therefore means a representative, in the representation of what? Of the instinctual movement which is called here Triebrequng. There is no ambiguity possible in the text at this point. He tells us explicitly that the Triebrequng, itself in any case, is a concept
and as such aims at what can even be called more precisely the unity of instinctual motion, and in this case there is no question of considering this Triebrequng, as either unconscious or as conscious.

他告訴我們，適當地說，只有這個能夠被壓抑。因此這意味著是一種表徵，什麼東西的表徵？本能活動的表徵，在此被稱為「無意識」。在這個文本裏的這一點，沒有任何可能模糊曖昧的東西。他清楚地告訴我們，這個無意識本身，無論如何，是一個概念。作為概念的本身，它目標朝著可以更加明確稱為是「本能動作的一致性」。在這個情形，要將這個「Triebrequng」認為是無意識，或是意識，這個問題就不言而喻。

This is what is said in the text. What does that mean? That simply means that we should take what we call Triebrequng as an (16) objective concept. It is an objective unity in so far as we look at it, and it is neither conscious nor unconscious, it is
simply what it is, an isolated fragment of reality which we will conceive of as having an incidence from its own action.

這就是文本裏所說的。那是什麼意思？那僅是意味著：我們應該將我們所謂的「無意識」，認為是一種客體的觀念。這是一個客體的一致性，當我們觀看它。它既不是意識，也不是無意識，它僅僅就是那樣。現實界的一個被孤立的碎片。我們將會構想它，當著是從它自己的活動發生的一個意外。

It is only all the more remarkable in my opinion that it should be its representative in the representation. This is the exact value of the German term, and only this representative of the drive that is in question, Trieb, can be said to belong to the
unconscious in so far as it precisely implies what I set out above with a question mark, namely an unconscious subject. I do not have to go much further here, I mean that you should begin to sense, it is precisely to specify what is this representative in the representation, and of course you see already, not where I want to get to, but where we necessarily get to, namely that the Vorstellunqsreprasentanz, even though Freud in his time and at the point that things could be said in scientific discourse this Vorstellunqsreprasentanz is strictly equivalent to the notion and to the term of signifier.

依我之見，這僅是更加引人注意，它應該是它自己在表徵中的表徵。這確實就是德文術語的價值。只有這個受到質疑的欲望驅力的表徵能夠說是屬於無意識。它確實暗示著，以上我用一個問號開始的東西，換句話說，一個無意識的生命主體。在此，我不需要再探索更遠。我的意思是：你們應該開始感覺到，這確實是要指明這個表徵裏的表徵是什麼？當然，你們已經看到，不是在我想要到達的地方，而是我們必須到達到地方。換句話說，這個「自由」，即使佛洛伊德在他的時代，事情能夠使用科學的真理論述來說時代，這個「自由」嚴格來說，相等於這個觀念，相等于意符的這個術語。

It is nothing else, even though it is only being introduced, and of course the demonstration has, it seems to me, already been introduced, because otherwise what is
the use of everything that I said above. This of course will always be further demonstrated, this is precisely what is in question.

那不是別的，即使它僅是正在被介紹，當然，我覺得，這個證明已經被介紹。否則我以上所說的一切，就沒有什麼用途。當然，這總是還需要更進一步證明。這確實就是受到質疑的地方。

That Freud on the contrary is opposed to this, is also articulated in the most precise fashion by himself. What does Freud say about everything that can be connoted under the terms of feelings, emotion, affect, which he himself reunites? He says that it is by a carelessness of expression which has, or which cannot, or which is not according to the context, some difficulties, like every carelessness, but there is a certain looseness when one says that it is unconscious. In principle, he says, it never can be, he formally denies it any possibility of an unconscious incidence.

相反的，佛洛伊德反對這種說法。他自己也以最確實的方式表達。佛洛伊德所說，關於能夠被意涵的一切，在感覺、情感、情意等，這些術語下，他自己想要重新結合什麼呢？他說，這是由於表達的粗心，沒有依照文本，才遭遇某些的困難，就像每一種粗心一樣。但是有某種的鬆散，當我們說，它就是無意識。在原則上，他說，它永遠不會是無意識。他正式地拒絕給予它，任何無意識意外的可能性。

This is expressed and repeated in a way which involves no doubt, no kind of ambiguity. Affect, as in talking about an unconscious affect, this means that it is perceived, but known; but known in what way? In its attachments, but not that it is unconscious, because it is always perceived, he tells us, simply it has gone and attached itself to another representation, which is not repressed. In other words, it had to accommodate itself to the context existing in the preconsciousness, which allows it to be considered by consciousness, which on occasion is not difficult, as a manifestation of its last context.

這件事情用某種方式被表達，被重複。無可置疑的，它並沒有牽涉到任何的模糊曖昧。情意，當我們談論到無意識的情意時，這意味著：情意被感覺，但是沒有被知道。在哪一方面，沒有被知道？在它的連繫，但是不是因為它是無意識，而是因為它總是被感覺到。他告訴我們，情意已經前往跟另外一個並沒有被壓抑的表徵，連繫在一起。換句話說，情意必須要接納自己，到存在於前意識的這個內涵。這個前意識使它能夠被意識所考慮。有時候，這並不困難，作為一種它自己最後的內涵的證明。

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