精神分析四个基本观念 503

Concept 503

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN Book XI
拉康研討班第十一冊

THE FOUR FUNDAMENTAL
CONCEPTS OF PSYCHOANALYSIS
精神分析四個基本觀念

5
TUCHE AND AUTOMATON

中斷與自動裝置

If the function of the dream is to prolong sleep, if the dream, after all, may come so near to the reality that causes it, can we not say that it might correspond to this reality without emerging from sleep? After all, there is such a thing as somnambulistic
activity.

假如夢的功用是要延長睡眠,假如夢, 畢竟,可能如此靠近引起它的現實,我們難道不能說,它可能沒有從睡眠裏出現,就回應現實界?畢竟,有夢遊症這麼一回事。

The question that arises, and which indeed all Freud’s previous indications allow us here to produce, is— What is it that wakes the sleeper? Is it not, in the dream, another reality? —the reality that Freud describes thus—Dass das Kind an seinem Bette steht, that the child is near his bed, ihn am takes him by the arm and whispers to him reproachfully, und ihm vorwurfsvoll Vater, siehst du denn nicht, Father, can’t you see, dass ich verbrenne, that I am burning?

這個出現的問題,確是是所有佛洛伊德先前的指示,容許我們在此產生的是—是什麼喚醒睡眠者?在夢裏,這難道不是另外一個現實界?佛洛伊德描述如下:這小孩靠近他的床,捉住他的手臂,小聲跟他譴責說:「你難道沒有看見,我身上著火了?」

Is there not more reality in this message than in the noise by which the father also identifies the strange reality of what is happening in the room next door. Is not the missed reality that caused the death of the child expressed in these words?

在這個訊息,比起這個噪音,難道沒有更多的現實界?父親根據這個噪音辨認這起奇特的現實界,隔壁房間正在發生的事情。這難道不是引起兒子死亡死亡的漏失的現實界,用這些話在表達?

Freud himself does not tell us that we must recognize in this sentence what perpetuates for the father those words forever separated from the dead child that were said to him, perhaps, Freud supposes, because of the fever—but who knows, perhaps
these words perpetuate the remorse felt by the father that the man he has put at his son’s bedside to watch over him may not be up to his task: die Besorgnis dass dergreise Wdchter seiner Aufgabe nichtgewachsen sein he may not be up to his job, in fact, he has gone to sleep.

佛洛伊德發本人並沒有告訴我們,我們必須在這個句子裏體認出,已經跟死去的小孩分開的,對父親強調的那些話,佛洛伊德認為是因為發高燒,而跟他說—但是誰曉得,或許這些話強調父親感覺到的悔恨,他交付照顧在兒子床邊的那個人,可能沒有盡到他的職責,他可能沒有盡到他的責任,事實上他已經睡著了。

Does not this sentence, said in relation to fever, you what, in one of my recent lectures, I called the cause of fever? And is not the action, apparently so urgent, of preventing
what is happening in the next room also perhaps felt as being in any case too late now, in relation to what is at issue, in the psychical reality manifested in the words spoken?

這個句子,因為發高燒才說的這個句子,在我最近的演講裏,難道不就是我所謂的發高燒的原因?這個行動,顯而易見是如此迫切,要阻止隔壁房間發生的事情,或許被感覺到目前已經太遲了,相關於所爭論的事情,在用被說出的話展示的心理現實界?

Is not the dream essentially, one might say, an act of homage to the missed reality—the reality that can no longer produce itself except by repeating itself endlessly, in some never attained awakening? What encounter can there be henceforth with that forever inert being—even now being devoured by the flames—if not the encounter that occurs precisely at the moment when, by accident, as if by chance, the flames come to meet him?

這個夢基本上難道不是一種表達敬意的一種行動,對於被漏失的現實界?這個現實界不再產生它自己,除了永無止盡地重複它自己,在永遠沒有獲得裏?因此對於那個永遠是惰性的生命實存,能夠有怎樣的邂逅?甚至現在正在被火焰吞沒—這難道不是這個邂逅確實發生在這個時刻,當偶然地,好像湊巧地,火焰前來會他?

Where is the reality in this accident, if not that it repeats something actually more fatal by means of reality, a reality in which the person who was supposed to be watching
over the body still remains asleep, even when the father reemerges after having woken up?

這個意外的現實界在哪里?難道不就是它憑藉現實界重複某件實際上更加致命的東西?這個現實界是,應該照顧身體的這個人,依舊還在睡眠當中,甚至當父親醒來後出現在那裏。

Thus the encounter, forever missed, has occurred between dream and awakening, between the person who is still asleep and whose dream we will not know and the person who has dreamt merely in order not to wake up.

因此邂逅,永遠被漏失,曾經發生在夢與清醒之間,發生在這個依舊睡覺,而我們不知道他的夢的這個人,與曾經作夢,為了不要醒來的這個人之間。

If Freud, amazed, sees in this the confirmation of his theory of desire, it is certainly a sign that the dream is not a phantasy fulfilling a wish.

假如佛洛伊德在這裏,感到驚奇地看到,他的欲望的理論的驗證,那確實是一種跡象:夢並不是實現欲望的幻見。

For it is not that, in the dream, he persuades himself that the son is still alive. But the terrible vision of the dead son taking the father by the arm designates a beyond that makes itself heard in the dream.

因為在夢裏,他說服他自己,兒子依舊還活著。但是死去兒子捉住父親手臂的可怕景象,指明著一種超越,使它自己在夢裏被聽見。

Desire manifests itself in the dream by the loss expressed in an image at the most cruel point of the object.

欲望在夢裏顯示它自己,根據一個意象處於客體最殘酷時被表達的損失。

It is only in the dream that this truly unique encounter can occur. Only a rite, an endlessly repeated act, can commemorate this not very memorable encounter—for no one can say what the death of a child is, except the father qua father, that is to say, no conscious being.

只有在夢裏,這個確實獨特的邂逅會發生。只是一個儀式,一個永無止盡地重複的行動,能夠慶祝這個沒有什麼值得紀念的邂逅—因為沒有人能夠說,死去的小孩是什麼,除了父親作為父親,換句話說,並不是意識的生命實存。

For the true formula of atheism is not God is dead—even by basing the origin of the function of the father upon his murder, Freud protects the father—the true formula of atheism is God is unconscious.

對於無神論的真實公式,並不是上帝已死—甚至根據將父親的功用的起源,建立在對他的謀殺上,佛洛伊德保護這個父親—無神論的真正公式是:上帝是無意識。

The awakening shows us the waking state of the subject’s consciousness in the representation of what has happened —the unfortunate accident in reality, against which one can do no more than take steps! But what, then, was this accident?

這個清醒跟我們顯示,生命主體的意識到清醒狀態,在所發生的事情的再現—在現實界的不幸的意外。我們僅能採取行動來對抗這個意外!但是要問的是,這個意外是什麼?

When everybody is asleep, including the person who wished to take a little rest, the person who was unable to maintain his vigil and the person of whom some well intentioned individual, standing at his bedside, must have said, He looks just as if he is asleep, when we know only one thing about him, and that is that, in this entirely sleeping world, only the voice is heard, Father, can’t you see I’m burning?

當每個人在睡眠當中,包括希望稍微休息的人,無法維持他的警覺的人,某個我們必須說他是具有善意的個人,站在他的床邊的這個人。他看起來好像他睡著,而我們對他只知道一件事情。那就是在他完全沉睡的世界裏,只有一個聲音被聽見:父親,你難道沒有看見,我身上正在著火嗎?

This sentence is itself a firebrand— of itself it brings fire where it falls—and one cannot see what is burning, for the flames blind us to the fact that the fire bears on the Unterlegt, on the Unt.ertragen, on the real.

這個句子本身是就是一個火把—它本身就帶來火焰,無論它掉在哪里—我們無法看出是什麼正在燃燒,因為火焰使我們看不見這個事實:火跟真實界有關。

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: