Desire 023 Jacques Lacan

Desire 023

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

They are given as such, and as the fact that putting them in place, their adaptation in the text, gives the meaning of this text.

這些增添本身被給予。當它們被放置在位,它們適應于這個文本,這個事實賦予這個文本的意義。

Please understand what I am saying. I am not saying that this is interpretation, and in effect it is perhaps interpretation, but I (26) am not saying it yet, I am suspending you at this moment where a certain signifier is designated as being produced by its lack.

請瞭解我正在說些什麼。我並不是說,這是解釋。實際上,它可能是解釋,但是我還沒有這樣說。我是正在將你們懸置在這個時刻,此時某一個意符被指明充當是它的欠缺所產生。

What is the phenomenon of the dream that is in question?

這個受到質疑的夢的現象是什麼?

It is by replacing it in the context of the dream that we accede right away to something which is given as being the understanding of the dream, namely that the subject finds himself in the familiar case, this reproach by which one reproaches oneself about someone who is loved, and this reproach leads us back in this example to the infantile signification of the death wish.

在這個夢的內容裏,以替代夢,我們立刻同意某件被給予的東西,作為對於這個夢的瞭解。換句話說,生命主體發現自己處於熟悉的情況。這個譴責,我們譴責我們自己,關於某一位被愛的人。在這個例子裏,這個譴責引導我們回到這個死亡的願望,對於嬰兒具有的意義。

We are here therefore before a typical case where the term transference, Übertragung, is employed in the primitive sense that it is first used in the Interpretation of dreams. It is a question of carrying forward something which is an original situation, the original death-wish on this occasion, into some different, current thing, which is an analogous, homologous, parallel wish which is similar in some fashion or other, and
introduces itself to revive this archaic wish that is in question.

因此在此我們面對一個典型的情況,「移情」這個術語被運用在這個原始的意義,它首次被運用在「夢的解析」的意義。問題是要將某件原初情境的東西,帶領向前,在這個場合,那就是原初的死亡,進入某個不同的目前的事物裏。這個事物是一種類同、類似、對比的願望。這個願望在某些方面是相似。它並且介紹它自己,為了要復活這個受到質疑的過時的願望。

It is naturally worthwhile dwelling on this, because it is starting from there simply that we can first try to elaborate what interpretation means, because we have left to one side the interpretation of “wishful”.

詳細描述這個當然是值得的,因為僅是從那裏開始,我們首先能夠設法建構解釋是什麼意思。因為我們曾經將「一廂情願」的解釋放置一旁。

To complete this interpretation there is only one remark to be made. If we are unable to translate wishful thinking by “pensée désireuse, pensée désirante” it is for a very simple reason: (27) It is that if “wishful thinking” has a meaning, of course it has a meaning, but it is employed in a context in which this meaning is not valid. If you wish to test every time that this term is employed, the suitability, the pertinence of the term “wishful thinking”, you only have to make the distinction that “wishful thinking” does not mean taking one’s desire for reality, as it is put, it is the meaning that thinking in so far as it slides, as it bends, therefore one should not attribute to this
term the signification: taking one’s desires for reality, as it is usually expressed, but taking one’s dream for reality, on this one condition precisely that it is quite inapplicable to the interpretation of the dream, because this simply means on this
occasion if my dream, is to this type of understanding of the dream, this simply means in this case that one has dreamed, in other words that one dreams because one dreams, and this indeed is the reason why this interpretation at this level is in no way
applicable at any time to a dream.

為了完成這個解釋,只有一個談論應該被從事。假如我們不能夠將「pensée désireuse, pensée désirante」,翻譯「一廂情願」,理由很簡單:假如「一廂情願」有一個意義,當然它就有一個意義。但是它被運用在某一個內容裏。在這個內容,這個意義並沒有根據。假如你們希望測試一下,每當這個術語被運用,「一廂情願」這個術語是否適合,是否中肯。你們所需要的,就是做這個區別,「一廂情願」並不意味著,將我們的欲望充當是現實界,如一般所說的。它的意思是:因為思想會滑溜,會彎曲,因此我們不應該將這個意義:將我們的欲望充當是現實界,如通常所表達的,歸屬於這個術語。而是要將我們的夢,充當是現實界。這確實是根據這個條件:它完全無法被運用到夢的解釋。因為在這個場合,這僅是意味著,假如我的夢,適用於這種夢的瞭解,這僅僅意味著,在我們作夢的這個情況,換句話說,我們作夢,是因為我們作夢。這確實是這個理由,為什麼這個層次的這個解釋,根本無法應用到任何其他時間的夢。

We must then come to the procedure described as the adding on of signifiers, which presupposes the previous subtraction of the signifier; I am speaking about what is presupposed in Freud’s text, subtraction being at that moment exactly the meaning of the term that he makes use of to designate the operation of repression in its pure form, I would say in its Unterdranqunq (28) effect.

因此,我們必須來到被描述為「意符的增添」的這個程式。這個程式預先假定這個意符的先前的扣減。我正在談論關於在佛洛伊德的文本裏,預先被假定的東西。在當時,扣減確實就是這個術語的意義。他使用這個術語,指明這個在純粹狀態的壓抑的運作。我不妨說,在它的「瞭解」的效應。

It is then that we find ourselves brought to a halt by something which as such, presented for us an objection and an obstacle, which if we had not decided in advance to find everything good, namely if we had not decided in advance to believe, to believe as Monsieur Prevert says, one should all the same dwell on the following: that the pure and simple restoration of these two terms: “nach seinem Wunsch” and
“dass er es wunschte”, namely that the son wished for this death of his father, the simple restoration of two clausulae from the point of view of what Freud himself designates to us as the final goal of interpretation, namely the re-establishment of unconscious desire, gives us strictly nothing because in that case what is restored?

因此,我們發現我們自己被某件東西擋住。這個的東西的本身被呈現給予我們,作為一種反對,及一種阻礙。假如我們沒有事先決定,要找出每一樣好的東西,換句話說,假如我們沒有事先決定要相信,要相信,如變態狂先生所說的,我們仍然應該詳述以下的內容:這兩個術語,「nach seinem Wunsch」及「dass er es wunschte」,純粹而簡單地恢復。換句話說,兒子希望他的父親的死亡。從佛洛伊德自己跟我們指明,作為解釋的最後目標,這個觀點具有的兩個多聲喧嘩,簡單地被恢復。換句話說,無意識欲望的重新被建立,根本沒有給予我們任何東西。因為在那種情況,什麼東西被恢復?

It is something that the subject knows perfectly well. During the extremely painful illness, the subject had effectively wished for his father’s death as being the solution and the end of his torment and his pain, and effectively of course he did not show
him, he did everything to hide from him, the desire, the wish which was in its context, in its recent experienced context, perfectly accessible to him. There is no need even in this connection to speak about preconsciousness but of conscious memory, perfectly accessible to the continued text of awareness.

這是某件生命主體心知肚明的事。在極端令人痛苦的疾病當中,生命主體很實際地希望他的父親的死亡,作為對他的折磨及他的痛苦的解決及結束。當然是很實際地,他並沒有顯露給他知道。他盡其能力隱藏不給他知道這個欲望,這個在其內涵裏的願望,在其最近被經驗到底內涵裏,他完全可以接觸得到。關於這一點,我們甚至沒有需要談論到前意識,而是要談論到意識的記憶,那是完全可以接觸得到,從已經知曉的繼續的文本。

Therefore if the dream subtracts from the text something which is (29) in no way removed from the consciousness of the subject, if it subtracts it, it is, as I might say, this phenomenon of subtraction which takes on a positive value, I mean that this is
the problem, it is the relationship of repression, in so far as without any doubt it is a question here of Vorstellungs – reprasentanz, and even a quite typical one, because if anything merits this term, it is precisely something which is, I would say in itself, a form empty of meaning “as he wished”, isolated in itself. This means nothing, this means “as he wished”, that we have previously spoken about, that he wished what?

因此,假如這個夢從文本扣減某件東西,這個東西絲毫沒有從生命主體的意識移除掉。假如他扣減它,我不妨這樣說,這個扣減的現象就具有正面的價值。我的意思是,這就是這個難題,這就是壓抑的關係。無可置疑的,在此,這是「表徵的觀念」的問題。它甚至是一個相當典型的問題,因為假如任何東西值得上這個術語,那確實是某件東西。我不妨說,這個東西本身,是一種意義被掏空的形式,「如他所願」這句話本身被孤立起來。這並不意味著什麼。這意味著,「如他所願」。我們先前已經談論過,他希望實現什麼?

This also depends on the sentence which comes before, and this is the direction in which I want to lead you to show you the irreducible character of what we are dealing with compared to any conception which arises out of the sort of imaginary elaboration, even the abstraction of the objectal data of a field, when it is a question of the signifier and what is supposed to be the originality of the field which, in the psyche, in experience, in the human subject, is established by it and by the action of the
signifier.

這也依靠在它前面的句子。這就是我希望引導你們的這個方向,為了跟你們顯示,我們正在處理的東西,具有這個無可化簡的特性,跟任何的觀念比較起來,任何起源於想像的建構,甚至是一個領域的客體資料的抽離。這是一個意符的問題,被認為是這個領域的原初的東西。在心理,在經驗,在人類的生命主體,這個領域被它所建立,被這個意符的這個行動。

This is what we have, these signifying forms which in themselves cannot be conceived of, cannot be sustained excepted in so far as they are articulated with other signifiers, and this in fact is what is in question. I know that I am here getting into something which would suppose a much longer articulation than anything we are dealing with.

這就是我們所擁有的東西,這些意符化的形式,它們本身無法被構想,無法被維持,除了它們用其他的意符來表達。事實上,這是受到質疑的地方。我知道,我在此探討到某件東西。這個東西假定會有一個更加漫長的表達,比任何我們正在處理的東西。

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: