Desire 022 Jacques Lacan

Desire 022

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

What can be extracted from the totality of Freud’s work concerning the relationships of this Vorstellunqsreprasentanz (22) with the primary process, is not open to any kind of doubt. If the primary process is entitled in so far as it is subject to the first principle, which is called the pleasure principle, there is no other way of conceiving the opposition which is marked in Freud between the pleasure principle and the reality
principle, except by perceiving that what is given to us as the hallucinatory arousal in which the primary process, namely desire at the level of the primary process, finds its satisfaction, does not simply concern an image, but something which is a signifier,
it is moreover a surprising thing that this was not noticed in other ways, I mean starting from clinical observation.

從全部的佛洛伊德的著作,關於這個「表徵理念」跟原初過程的關係,所能夠抽取出來的東西,無法承受任何種類的懷疑。假如原初的過程能夠自圓其說,因為它隸屬於所謂的「快樂原則」的第一原則。那就沒有辦法來構想佛洛伊德標明的這種的對立:快樂原則與現實原則的對立。除了就是讓我們感覺到:我們被給予的這種幻覺的喚起。在裏面,原初的過程,換句話說,欲望處於原初過程的層次,找到它自己的滿足。它不僅關係到一個形象,而且是某件屬於一個意符的東西。而且,令人驚奇的是,在許多方式,它都沒有被注意到。我的意思是,從臨床的觀察開始。

One It was never noticed in other ways, it seems, precisely to the degree that the notion of signifier was something which was not elaborated at the time of the great expansion of classical psychiatry, because after all in the massiveness of clinical
experience, under what forms are there presented to us the major, problematic, most insistant forms in which there are posed for us the question of hallucination, if not in verbal hallucinations or in verbal structures, namely in the intrusion, the immixtion in
the field of the real not of something indifferent, not of an image, not of a phantasy, not of what is often simply supposed to support hallucinatory processes?

第一種是:在許多方式,它沒有被注意到,似乎到達這個程度:意符的觀念,並不是被建構在古典的精神病學的大量擴展的時代。因為畢竟,在大量的臨床經驗,在我們所被給予的形式,最主要、最棘手、最持續的形式,幻覺的問題會在那裏,跟我們提出。它難道不就是以文辭的幻覺,或是以文辭的結構。換句話說,在真實界的這個闖入,這個混合,它難道不是某件漠不關心的東西?不是一個意像,不是一個幻見,不是時常所被認為是支持幻覺的過程?

But if an hallucination poses us problems which are proper to (23) itself, it is because it is a question of signifiers and not of images, not of causes, not of perceptions, indeed of false perceptions of the real as people say it is. But at Freud’s level there is no doubt about this and precisely at the end of this article,- to illustrate what he calls der neurotischen Wahrung (SE 12 225;GW Q 238), namely – it is a term to retain,
the word Wahrung means to last; it is not very common in German, it is linked to the verb wahren which is a durative form of the verb wahren, and this idea of duration, of valorisation, because it is its most common usage: if the word Wahrung refers to
duration, the most common usage which is made up of it, is value, valorisation – to talk to us about a properly neurotic valorisation, namely in so far as the primary process erupts into it, Freud takes as an example a dream, and here is this dream.

但是假如幻覺跟我們提出這些難題,屬於幻覺本體的難題,那是因為問題是在於這些意符,而不是在於這些意象,不是在於原因,也不是在於感覺。的確,不是在於真實界的這些虛假的感覺,如人們所說的。但是在佛洛伊德的層次,關於這一點上無可置疑的。確實是在這篇文章的末尾,為了舉例說明他所謂的「神經質患者的執著」。換句話是,這是一個「保留」的術語。「執著」這個字詞意思是「持續下去」。這種用法在德文並不很普遍,它跟「持續」這個動詞有關。它是「持續」這個動詞的延續的期間。這個期間的觀念,「給予價值」的觀念,因為這是最普遍的用法,假如「持續」這個字詞提到的期間。由它所組成的最普遍的用法,就是價值,給予價值。為了跟我們談論,有關一個神經質患者的適當地給予價值,換句話說,原初的過程爆發進入裏面,佛洛伊德拿夢當一個例子。在此就是這個夢。

It is the dream of a subject who is mourning for his father, who had, he tells us, nursed him through a long and painful mortal illness.

一個生命主體的夢是對於父親的哀悼。他告訴我們,他的父親曾經養育他,度過一段漫長而痛苦的致命疾病。

This dream is presented as follows: “His father was alive once more and he was talking to him in his usual way. But he felt it exceedingly painful that his father had really died, only without knowing it.” (SE 12 225) It is a short dream, it is a dream
which as always, Freud tackles at the level of its transcription, because the essential of Freudian analysis is always based on the (24) narrative of the dream, first of all in so far as it is articulated.

這個夢呈現如下:「他的父親再一次活著,他正在跟他談話,以他平常的方式。但是他覺得他的父親的真正的死亡,極端令人痛苦,只是自己並不知曉。」這是一個簡短的夢,但是像平常一樣,佛洛伊德處理這個夢,以它的記錄的層次。因我佛洛伊德精神分析學的重點,總是建立在對於夢的描述的基礎上。首先,就是以夢被表達的方式。

This dream then was repeated insistently in the months which followed the death of his father, and how is Freud going to tackle it?

這個夢因此不斷地被重複,從那些遭遇父親死亡的人的嘴中。佛洛伊德如何來處理這個夢呢?

There is no doubt of course that Freud never thought at any time that a dream, if only because of this distinction that he always made between the manifest content and the latent content, in referring himself immediately to what can be called and which one
does not fail to call at every instant in analysis by this term which has not, I think, an equivalent, of wishful thinking.

當然,這是無可置疑的,佛洛伊德從來沒有一次想過,一個夢,因為他總是從事的這個區別,處於明顯的內容及潛在的內容之間的區別,當他自己立刻提到,所能稱呼的內容。這個夢,我們在精神分析學根據這個術語,一定會稱呼的內容。
我認為,這個術語並沒有相等於是一廂情願。

It is this that I would almost like to give back some sound of equivalence with alarm. This just by itself should make an analyst suspicious, even defensive, and persuade him that he is taking the wrong road.

就是這個,我想要令人大吃一驚地,回饋某種相等語的聲音。這個夢的本身,應該使一位精神分析師感到懷疑,甚至是防衛。這個夢的本身應該使他相信,他的探究的途徑是錯誤。

There is no doubt that for a moment Freud teases this “wishful”,, and tells us that it is simply because he needs to see his father and that that makes him happy, because it is not at all enough, for the simple reason that it does not seem at all to be a satisfaction, and that this happens with the elements and in a context whose painful character is sufficiently marked, to make us avoid this sort of precipitous step which I mention here to show that at the limit it is possible.

無可置疑的,佛洛伊德曾經有一陣子揶揄過這個「一廂情願」,並且告訴我們,不僅是因為他需要看見他的父親,這會使他感到快樂,因為這根本就不足夠。理由很簡單,它似乎根本就不是一種滿足。這個夢發生,擁有這些元素,在一個內容裏。這個內容的令人痛苦的特性,充份地被標示出來,為了讓我們避免這種的突如其來的步驟,我在此提到,為了要顯示,推到極端,這個令人痛苦的特性是可能的。

When all is said and done I do not think that a single analyst could go that far when
it is a question of a dream. But it is precisely because one (25) cannot go so far when it is a question of a dream, that psychoanalysts are no longer interested in dreams.
How does Freud tackle things? We will stay with his text:

當一切都說都做了,我不認為,單是一位精神分析師就能夠進展那麼遠,就夢的問題而言。但是確實是因為我們無法進展那麼遠,就夢的問題。精神分析師不再對於夢感到興趣。佛洛伊德如何處理這些事情?讓我們追蹤他的文本。

“The only way,” he writes in this article, right at the end, “the only way of understanding this apparently nonsensical dream is by adding as the dreamer wished’ or in consequence of his wish’ after the words that his father had really died’, and by further adding that he (the dreamer) wished it’ to the last words. The dream-thought then runs: it was a painful memory for him that he had been obliged to wish for his father’s death ……. and how terrible it would have been if his father had had any suspicion of it !”

「唯一的方式,」他在他的文章中寫到,就在文章末尾,「唯一可以瞭解這個顯然是無意義的夢的方法,是將他的父親已經真正死亡之後的這些話語,增添當著作夢者的願望,或是作為他的願望的結果。而且增添為,作夢者希望這個夢是最後的話語。這個夢與思想因此這樣運轉:對於他而言,這是一個令人痛苦的記憶,他不得不希望他的父親的死亡、、、假如他的父親當時懷疑到這種想法,那會是一件多麽可怕的事情!」

This leads you to give its weight to the fashion that Freud treats the problem. It is a signifier. These are things which are clausulae (?) and we are going to try to articulate on the linguistic plane what they are, the exact value of what is given here as permitting access to the understanding of the dream.

這會引導你們重視這個方式,佛洛伊德處理這個難題的方式。這是一個意符。有些事情在此是多聲喧嘩。根據語言的層次,我們將設法表達它們是什麼,在此所被給予的內容的確實的價值,作為容許我們接近這個夢的瞭解,

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: