Desire 63 Jacques Lacan

Desire 63

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

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

14.1.59 116
Seminar 8: 14 January 1959

Freud indicates to us that that which, at the level of enunciating, at the apparently most developed level therefore of the assumption of the subject, at the point at which the it poses itself as conscious with respect to, we will not say its own production because precisely the riddle remains entire – from whom does this enunciation that we are talking about come? – the subject does not decide, if he says “I dreamt” it is with its own connotation and accent which means that the one who dreamt is all the same something which with respect to him presents itself as problematic.

佛洛伊德跟我們指示:在表達的層次,在生命主體的假定的最發展的層次,在這一點,它提出它自己作為意識,關於,我們姑且不說是它自己的產品,因為那個地方確實是謎團重重。我們正在談論的這個表達來自誰呢?生命主體並沒有決定,假如他說:「我作夢」,那是用夢的內涵及強調。意思是:作夢的這個人仍然是某件呈現它自己,作為棘手難題,關於這個生命主體。

The subject of this enunciating contained in the enunciation that we are dealing with, and with a question mark, was for a long time considered to be God before becoming the self of the subject. It is more or less with Aristotle …

在我們正在處理的表達當中,用一個問號,所表包括的這個表達的生命主體,長久以來,就是在他還沒有變成生命主體的「大我」的上帝。這跟亞力斯多德的說法頗為一致。

To return to this beyond of the subject which is the Freudian unconscious, a whole oscillation, a whole vacillation is produced which still leaves a permanent question about its otherness. And what the subject takes up from this afterwards, has the same
fragmentary nature, has the same value of signifying element as what is produced in the spontaneous phenomenon of substitution, of the deranging of the signifier, which is what Freud on the other hand show us to be the normal way to decipher the meaning of the dream.

回到生命主體的這個超越,它就是佛洛伊德的無意識,一種整體的搖擺,一種整體的搖擺被產生。它依舊留下一個永恆的問題關於它的大它者。後來,這個生命主體從這裏所從事的,擁有相同的碎片的特性,擁有能指元素的相同的價值,作為代替的自動自發現象,能指點混亂的現象。這就是佛洛伊德在另一方面跟我們顯示是正常的方式,來解釋夢的意義。

In other words, the fragmentation which is produced at the level of enunciating, in so far as enunciating is the assumption of the dream by the subject, is something which Freud tells us is on the (11) same plane and of the same nature as the following, which
the rest of his doctrine shows us to be the way of interpreting a dream, namely the maximum signifying decomposition, the spelling out of signifying elements in so far as it is in this spelling out that there will reside the highlighting of the possibilities
of the dream, namely of these intersections, of these intervals that it leaves and which only appear to the degree that the signifying chain is related to, is recut, is intersected by all the other chains which in connection with each of the elements of the dream may be interlaced, intermingled with the first.

換句話說,在表達的層次被產生的碎片化。因為表達是生命主體的夢的假定,這個碎片化是某件佛洛伊德告訴我們,處於相同的層次,屬於相同的特性,跟底下,他的其餘的信條跟我們顯示為解釋夢的方式。換句話說,最大量的能指的瓦解,能指元素的澄清。因為夢的可能性的強調就駐紮在這個澄清裏。換句話說,這些互相交會的強調,它留下的這些間隔,它僅僅跟能指鎖鏈相關的程度,它被重新被切割,被所有其他的意符鎖鏈交會。關於夢的每一個元素,其他的意符鎖鏈可能會跟前面的意符鎖鏈交織及混合。

In other words it is to the extent, and in a more exemplary fashion in connection with the dream than in connection with any other discourse, it is to the degree that in the discourse of the subject, in the actual discourse, we allow to vacillate, we allow
to be detached from the actual signification the signifier that is involved in this enunciating, it is in this way that we approach that which in the subject is called in the Freudian doctrine unconscious.

換句話說,到這個程度,以更加是典範的方式,關於這個夢,比起任何的其他的真理論述。到達這個程度,在生命主體的真理論述,在實際的真理論述,我們容許這個能指搖擺,我們容許這個能指跟實際的意義隔離。這個牽涉到這個表達的能指。就是以這個方式,我們接近生命主體身上佛洛伊德信條所謂的無意識。

It is in the measure that the signifier is involved, it is in the possibilities of rupture, in the points of rupture of this unconscious that there lies the thing we are tracking down, what we are there to look for, namely the essential thing that has happened in the subject which keeps (maintenant) certain signifiers in repression. And this something is going to allow us to follow precisely the path of his desire, namely this something in the subject which is maintained in this capture by the signifying network, must so to speak in order to be revealed pass through this mesh, be subject to this filtering, to this (12) sifting of the signifier and which is what we have as our aim to replace and to restore in the discourse of the subject.

隨著這個能指牽涉的程度,這就是斷裂的可能性。在無意識的斷裂的這些點,我們正在追蹤的這個東西就在那裏。換句話說,發生在生命主體身上的,基本的東西,維持某些的能指在倒退那裏。這個某件東西,將要容許我們確實地遵照他的欲望的途經。換句話說,生命主體身上這個某件東西,在這個斷裂裏被維持,被這個能指的網路。也就是說,為了要被顯示出來,它必須通過這個網路,承受這種過濾,承受這個能指的篩選。這就是我們所擁有的,作為我們要取代及恢復的目標,在生命主體的真理論述裏。

How are we able to do it? What does the fact that we are able to do it signify? I told you, desire is essentially linked, by the doctrine, by the practice, by the Freudian experience, in this position, it is excluded, enigmatic, or it is posed with respect to the subject as being essentially linked to the existence of the signifier, which is repressed as such, and its reinstatement, its restoration is linked to the return of these signifiers. But this does not mean that the reinstatement of these signifiers purely and simply enuntiates the desire.

我們如何能夠做到這一點?我們能夠做到這一點的這個事實意味著什麼?我告訴你們,欲望基本上是相關聯,跟這種信條,跟這種實踐,跟佛洛伊德的精神分析學經驗,在這個謎團一般的立場,它被排除,或者說,它被提出,關於這個生命主體,作為基本上跟這個能指的存在息息相關。能指的本身被壓抑,它的重新陳述,它的恢復跟這些能指點回轉息息相關。但是,這並不意味著:這些能指點重新陳述純粹就是表達欲望。

What is articulated in these repressed signifiers, and what is always a demand, is one thing, the desire is something else, in so far as desire is something through which the subject situates himself, because of the existence of discourse, with respect to this demand.

在這些被壓抑的能指裏,所被表達的,總是一個要求的是一件東西。欲望是某件其他的東西。欲望是某件其他的東西,透過這個東西,生命主體定位它自己,因為真理論述的存在,關於這個需求。

It is not what he demands that is in question, it is what he is in function of this 、demand, and what he is in the measure that this demand is repressed, is masked. And this is what is expressed in an obscure fashion in the phantasy of his desire.

受到置疑的並不是他所要求的東西,而是他在行使要求這個功用。隨著這個要求的被壓抑,他的生命本質被遮蔽起來。這就是所被壓抑的東西,在他的欲望的幻見裏,以這個模糊的形式。

It is his relationship to a being of which there would be no question if there did not exist demand, discourse, which is fundamentally language, but of which there begins to be question from the moment that language introduces this dimension of being,
and at the same time conceals it from him.

他跟一個生命實存的關係。假如沒有需求,真理論述存在,就沒有生命實存的問題。真理論述基本上是語言,但是有關語言的問題會開始,從語言介紹生命實存的維度,並且同時地隱藏它,不讓生命主體知道的時刻。

The reinstatement of the meaning of the phantasy, namely of something imaginary, comes between the two lines, between the enunciation of the intention of the subject, and this something in which in a decomposed (13) fashion he reads that this intention is profoundly fragmented, cut up, refracted by language; between the two is this phantasy where he habitually suspends his relationship to being.

幻見的意義的重新陳述,換句話說,某件想像的陳述,介入這兩行之間,介人生命主體的意圖的表達與這個某件東西之間。在這個東西裏,以一個被瓦解的方式,他閱讀到:這個意圖深刻地被語言零碎化,被切碎,被折射。存在於這兩者之間的是這個幻見。在幻見這裏,他習慣地懸置他跟生命實存的關係。

But this phantasy, more than anything else, is always enigmatic. And what does it want? The following: that we should interpret it. To interpret desire, is to reinstate something to which the subject can not accede all by himself: namely the affect which designates at the level of this desire which is his – I am speaking about the precise desire that intervenes in one or other incident of the life of the subject, of the masochistic desire, of the suicidal desire, of the oblative desire, on different occasions.

但是這個幻見總是一個謎團,超過其他東西。它倒底想要什麼?它想要以下的東西:我們應該解釋它。解釋欲望,就是重新陳述某件生命主體單獨不能同意的東西。換句話說,在這個屬於他的欲望的層次,指明的情意。我是在談論到這個確實的欲望,介入於生命主體的生活的某種意外,受虐狂的欲望,自殺的欲望,這個奉獻的欲望,依不同場合而定。

雄伯譯
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: