拉康論移情 1123d

拉康論移情 1123d


Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 2; Wednesday 23 November 1960

But he was all the same a rather special one. Imagine that it is somebody like Mr. Massignon and who at the same time is Henry Miller. That would
produce a certain effect. It would lead to some difficulties for Jean-Jacques Pauvert who would have published this work.


Let us recall this at the moment when it is a question of noting
that this astonishing work has been transmitted to us throughout
the centuries by the hands of what we should call in different ways different kinds of benighted friars, which means that we have without any doubt the complete text.


Well! That is what I thought, not without a certain admiration,
in leafing through this admirable edition which Henri Estienne
gave us of it in a Latin translation.


And this edition is definitive enough for there still to be now, in all the different learned, critical editions, it is already, this edition, the perfect critical one whose pagination is given to us.


Those who are coming to this for the first time, should know that the
little 272a or others, by which you see noted the pages to which
you should refer, is only the pagination of Henri Estienne (1578).

那些第一次來這裏的那些人應該知道:在272頁左右,你們看到有頁數被注明,你們應該參照一下。這是亨利 耶提尼的唯一頁碼。

Henri Estienne was certainly not benighted, but one finds it difficult to believe that someone who was capable (this was not all he did) of devoting himself to producing such monumental editions [had an] openness to life such that he could fully appreciate the contents of what there is in this text, I mean in so far as it is above all a text about love.

亨利 耶提尼確定並不是欠缺知識,但是我們發現我們很難相信:能夠專注精力來產生這部钜作版本的人(未必是他一人之功),會公開接受這樣的生活,他才能夠欣賞這個文本裏面的內容。我的意思,這尤其是有關愛的文本。

At the same epoch – that of Henri Estienne – other people were interested in love and I can tell you quite frankly: when I spoke to you last year at length about the sublimation of the love of women, the hand which I was holding invisibly was not that of Plato nor of some erudite person, but that of Marguerite of Navarre.

在相同的時代—亨利 耶提尼的時代—還有其他人對於愛感到興趣,我相當坦白地告訴你們:當我去年跟你們詳細地談論有關女人的愛的昇華,我手裏隱形握著的,並不是柏拉圖的版本,也不是某位博學之士的版本,而是瑪格麗特的版本。

I alluded to it without insisting. You should know, for this sort of banquet, of sumposion also which her Heptameron is, she carefully excluded these sort of people with dirty nails who were emerging at the time and renewing the content of the libraries.


She only wants knights, lords, personages who, in speaking about love speak about something that they had time to live.


And also in all the commentaries which have been given about the Symposium it is indeed this dimension which often seems to be lacking that we thirst after. It does not matter.


(7) Among those people who never doubt that their understanding – as Jaspers says – attains the limits of the concrete-tangible comprehensible, the story of Alcibiades and Socrates has always been difficult to swallow.


As testimony I will only take the following: that Louis le Roy, Ludovicus rejus, who is the first translator into French of these texts which were just emerging from the orient for western culture, quite simply stopped there, at the entry of Alcibiades. He translated nothing after that.

作為證詞,我僅是接受以下:路易士 雷羅是第一位將這些文本翻譯成法文的翻譯者。這些文本剛剛從東方出現在西方文化,就是停頓在那兒,在阿西比底斯進入饗宴的地方。後面部分,他根本就不翻譯了。

It seemed to him that enough beautiful discourses had been made
before Alcibiades entered. Which indeed is in fact the case


Alcibiades appeared to him as something added on, apocryphal, and he is not the only one to have behaved in this way. I will spare you the details. But Racine received one day from a lady who had been working on a translation of the Symposium a manuscript to look over. Racine who was a sensitive man had considered that as untranslatable and not alone the story of Alcibiades but all the Symposium.


We have his notes which prove that he had looked very closely at the manuscript which had been sent to him; but as regards redoing it, because it was a question of nothing less than redoing it (it needed somebody like
Racine to translate the Greek), he refused.


A small thing for him. Third reference. I have the good luck to have found a long time ago, in a corner, handwritten notes from the course given by Brochard on Plato.


It is very remarkable, these notes are very well taken, the writing is exquisite. In connection with the theory of love, Brochard of course refers to all the appropriate things: the Lysis, the Phaedrus, the Symposium.


Above all the Symposium. There is a very well done operation of
substitution when one arrives at the Alcibiades affair. He links up, he switches things onto the Phaedrus which, at that moment takes up the baton. He does not take responsibility for the story of Alcibiades.



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: