精神分析四个基本观念 504

Concept 501

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

This is certainly what brings us to recognizing in this detached sentence from the dream of the grief-stricken father the counterpart of what will be, once he is awake, his consciousness, and to ask ourselves what is the correlative, in the dream, of the
representation.

這確實是我們被引導體認出這個相對之物,在這個跟痛苦萬分的父親的夢分隔的句子,當一旦他醒來,他的意識將會是什麼的相對之物。我們被引導詢問我們自己,在夢裏,跟這個情景的再現相關的是什麼。

This question is all the more striking in that, here, we see the dream really as the counterpart of the representation; it is the imagery of the dream and it is an opportunity for us to stress what Freud, when he speaks of the unconscious,
designates as that which essentially determines it, the Vorstellungsreprasentanz.

這個問題是更加耐人尋味,因為在此,我們看到這個夢,真正作為情景再現的相對之物。這是夢的意象,這是個機會我們能夠強調,當佛洛伊德談到無意識,他指明作為基本上決定無意識的東西,那就是「Vorstellungsreprasentanz.」

This means not, as it has been mistranslated, the representative representative (le reprCsentant représentatif), but that which takes the place of the representation (Ic tenantlieu tie la representation).

這並不意味著一般所誤譯的「再現」,而是發生在再現情景裏的東西。

We shall see its function later. I hope I have helped you to grasp what is nodal in the
encounter, qua encounter forever missed, and which really sustains, in Freud’s text, what seems to him, in his dream, absolutely exemplary.

我們以後將會看出它的功用。我希望我曾經幫忙你們理解這種邂逅的節點,作為永遠被漏失的邂逅。在佛洛伊德的文本,它真正維持在他的夢裏他覺得是絕對典範的東西。

The place of the real, which stretches from the trauma to the phantasy—in so far as the phantasy is never anything more than the screen that conceals something quite primary, something determinant in the function of repetition—this is what we must now examine.

真實界的位置,從創傷延伸到幻見—幻見永遠不是別的,那就是隱藏某件相當原初的螢幕,某件決定性的東西,在重複的功用—這是我們現在必須檢視的。

This, indeed, is what, for us, explains both the ambiguity of the function of awakening and of the function of the real in this awakening. The real may be represented by the accident, the noise, the small element of reality, which is evidence that we are not dreaming.

對於我們而言,這確實是解釋為什麼,清醒的功用與在這個清醒裏,真實界的功用,會有曖昧模糊的地方。真實界可能由這個意外,這個噪音,這個現實界的小因素所代表。這證明我們不是正在作夢。

But, on the other hand, this reality is not so small, for what wakes us is the other
reality hidden behind the lack of that which takes the place of representation—this, says Freud is the Trieb.

但是在另一方面,這個現實界並不是如此小,因為喚醒我們的東西,是另外一個現實界,它被隱藏在發生于再現情景的東西的欠缺。佛洛伊德說,這就是「Trieb」

But be careful! We have not yet said what this Trieb is —and if, for lack of representation, it is not there, what is this Trieb? We may have to consider it as being only Trieb to come.

但是小心?我們還沒有說到這個「Trieb驅力」是什麼—假如,由於欠缺再現情景,它並不在那裏,那這個「Trieb驅力」是什麼?我們可能必須認為它是未來的唯一「Trieb驅力」。

How can we fall to see that awakening works in two directions— and that the awakening that re-situates us in a constituted and represented reality carries out two tasks?
我們如何會看不出:清醒朝兩個方向運作?重新定位我們在情景構成與再現的現實界的清醒,執行的是兩種工作?

The real has to be sought beyond the dream—in what the dream has enveloped, hidden from us, behind the lack of representation of which there is only one representative. This is the real that governs our activities more than any other and it is psychoanalysis that designates it for us.

真實界必須在超越夢的地方被尋求—在夢已經涵蓋的部分,隱藏不給我們知道的部分,處於再現情景的欠缺背後,那裏只有一位再現物。這就是真實界,統治我們的活動,勝過其他活動。這是精神分析指明它給我們。

3
Thus Freud finds himself providing the solution to the problem which, for the most acute of the questioners of the soul before him—Kierkegaard—had already been centred on repetition.

因此,佛洛伊德發現他自己供應這個難題的解答。對於在他之前,最為敏銳的靈魂探問者—齊克果—這個難題已經集中在「重複」。

I would ask you to re-read Kierkegaard’s essay on Repetition, so dazzling in its lightness and ironic play, so truly Mozartian in the way, so reminiscent of Don Giovanni, it abolishes the mirages of love.

我將會要求你們重新閱讀齊克果的論文「重複」。那篇論文揮灑的多麼的輕佻反諷,令人目眩撩亂,讓人想起莫劄特的音樂,「唐、吉奧梵尼」。它廢除了愛的幻見。

With great acuteness, and in a quite unanswerable way, Kierkegaard stresses the feature that, in his love, the young man—whose portrait Kierkegaard paints for us with a mixture of emotion and derision—addresses only to himself through the medium of memory.

敏銳萬分而且無由回答,齊克果強調這個特徵:在他的愛裏,這位年輕人—他的肖像,齊克果跟我們描繪出來,混合著情感與嘲弄—他通過記憶的媒介,跟他自己表白。

Really, is there not something here more profound than La Rochefoucauld’s remark that few would experience love if they had not had its ways and means explained to them? Yes, but who began it?

的確,比起羅查佛科德的說教,在此難道不是有某件更加深刻?這個說教的內容是:假如人們沒有遵照愛的方式及方法尋求愛,沒有幾個人會經驗到愛。說得沒錯。但是誰先開始這樣的愛呢?

And does not everything essentially begin by deceiving the first to whom the
enchantment of love was addressed—who has passed off this enchantment as the exaltation of the other, by making himself the prisoner of this exaltation, of this breathlessness which, with the other, has created the most false of demands, that of
narcissistic satisfaction, the ego ideal whether it is or the ego that regards itself as the ideal?

愛的一切,難道基本上不是從欺騙受到愛的迷惑的對方開始?對方假裝這個迷惑,作為另一方的昇華,讓他自己成為這個昇華,這個陶醉的囚犯,然後跟另一方在一起,創造最為虛假的要求,自戀滿足的要求,自我理想的要求,不管是自我真的是理想,還是認為自己是理想的自我。

Freud is not dealing with any repetition residing in the natural, no return of need, any more than is Kierkegaard. The return of need is directed towards consumption placed at the service of appetite. Repetition demands the new. It is turned towards the ludic, which finds its dimension in this new —Freud also tells us this in the chapter I referred to last time.

佛洛伊德並沒有處理駐居在自然界的重複,也沒有處理需要的回轉,正如齊克果也沒有。需要的回轉被引導朝向放置在替欲望服侍的消費。重複要求這個新的東西。它被引導朝向在這個新的東西,找到它的維度的「嬉戲」。

Whatever, in repetition, is varied, modulated, is merely alienation of its meaning. The adult, and even the more advanced child, demands something new in his activities, in his games.

在重複裏,任何變化,調適的東西,都僅是它自己的意義的疏離。成年人,甚至年紀較大的小孩,都要求某件新的東西,在他的活動,在他的遊戲裏。

But this ‘sliding-away’ (glissement) conceals what is the true secret of the ludic, namely, the most radical diversity constituted by repetition in itself. It can be seen in the child, in his first movement, at the moment when he is formed as a human being, manifesting himself as an insistence that the story should always be the same, that its recounted realization should be ritualized, that is to say, textually the same.

但是這個「溜走」隱藏「嬉戲」的真正秘密。換句話說,由重複本身形成的廣泛多樣性。我們從小孩身上看到,在他第一個行動,在他被形成人類的時刻,展現他自己,作為一種堅持:故事應總是一樣,故事的描述的實現應該儀式化。也就是說,作為「我」的文本總是一樣。

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: