拉康論移情 0419

拉康論移情 0419


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 17: Wednesday 19 April 1961

I take up again before you my difficult discourse, more and more
difficult because of the aims of this discourse. To say for example that I am leading you today onto unknown terrain would be inappropriate because, if I begin today to lead you onto a terrain, it is necessarily because from the beginning I already began.

我在你們面前再一次從事我困難的論述,越來越困難,因為這個論述的目標。 譬如,說我今天正在引導你們進入未知的平臺,將是不適當的說法。因為,假如我今天開始引導你們進入一個平臺, 那必須是因為從一開始,我已經開始。

Moreover to speak about unknown terrain when it is a question of our own, of the one which is called the unconscious, is still more inappropriate because what is in question, and what constitutes the difficulty of this discourse, is that I can say nothing about it which does not take on all its weight precisely from what I do not say about it.


It is not that one should not say everything, the fact is that in order to speak with precision we cannot say everything, even about what we can formulate, because there is already something in the formula which – as you will see, we grasp it at every instant – precipitates what is in question into the imaginary, which is essentially what happens because of the fact that the human subject as such is prey to the symbol.

倒不是因為我們不應該道盡一切,事實上,為了正確地言說,我們無法道盡一切,甚至關於我們所能夠說明,因為已經有某件東西,在這個公式—你們看出, 我們在每個時刻都掌握它—將受到質疑的東西突然拋入想像界。這基本上是所發生的事情,因為這個事實:人類的生命主體本身是象徵符號的獵物。

At the point that we have got to in it, this “to the symbol”, be careful, should it be put in the singular or the plural? Undoubtedly in the
singular in so far as the one which I introduced the last time is
properly speaking as such the unnamable symbol – we are going to see why and how – the symbol <p (big phi), precisely this point at which I must today take up my discourse again in order to show you how it is indispensable for us in order to understand the incidence of the castration complex on the mainspring of transference.

在那裡我們必須到達這一點,這個「象徵符號的獵物」。但是請小心,這個象徵符號應該用單數還是複數來表達?無可置疑的, 是用單數,因為我上一次跟你們介紹的這個象徵符號,適當來說, 本身是無法命名的符號—我們將要看出,為什麼及如何—陽具的這個象徵符號,確實是我今天必須再一次從事我的論述的這一點,為了要跟你們顯示,我們如何不可免除,為了瞭解閹割情結的意外,對於移情的原動力。

There is a fundamental ambiguity between symbolic phallus and imaginary phallus, concretely involved in the psychical economy. The place where we encounter it, where we first encountered it, particularly where the neurotic lives it out in a fashion which represents his particular mode of manoeuvering, of operating with this radical, fundamental difficulty that I am trying to articulate before you through the usage that I give to this symbol $ (big phi) which the last time and many times previously, I briefly designated, I mean in a rapid, abbreviated fashion as the symbol which corresponds to the place where there is produced the lack of signifier.

在象徵符號的陽具與想像界的陽具之間,有一個基本的曖昧,具體地牽涉到心靈的活動。我們邂逅它的地方, 我們首次邂逅它的地方, 特別是神經症實踐它的地方,使用代表他的特別的運作模式的方式。它運作這個積極,基本的困難,我在你們面前正在設法表達,通過我給予這個陽具的象徵符號的用法。上一次,以及先前的許多次,我簡短地指明,我的意思是,以迅速而簡短的方式,作為符合這個地方的象徵符號。 在那裡,能指的欠缺被產生。

If I have unveiled anew from the beginning of this session this image which served us the last time as a support to introduce the paradoxes and the antinomies linked to these diverse slippages, so subtle, so difficult to retain in their different moments and nevertheless indispensable to sustain, if we want to understand what is in question in the castration complex (and which are the displacements and the absences, and the levels and the substitutions where there intervenes what analytic experience shows us more and more), this phallus in its multiple, quasiubiquitous formulae, you see it in experience, if not re-emerging, at least you cannot deny that it is re-evoked at every instant in theoretical writings under the most diverse forms and even up to the final term of the most primitive investigations on what happens in the first pulsations of the (2) soul – the phallus which you see at the final term identified, for example, with the force of primitive aggressivity in so far as it is the worst object encountered at the end in the mother’s womb and that it is moreover the most dangerous object.

假如從這個研討的開始,我曾經重新揭發這個意象,上一次,這個意象替我們充當一種支援,來介紹這些矛盾與對立,跟這些多樣性的捉摸不定息息相關。這種捉摸不定是如此的微妙,如此困難維持,在它們不同的時刻,可是又不可免除地要維持,假如我們想要瞭解,在閹割情結,是什麼受到質疑,(就是這些替代與欠缺),這些層次與替代, 在那裡,精神分析經驗越來越跟我們顯示的,在那裡介入), 這個陽具,在它的多重的,類似無所不在的公式, 你們在精神分析經驗裡看到它),即使不是重新出現, 至少,你們不能否認, 它在理論的著作裡,隨時都會被召喚,以最多樣的形式。甚至到最原始研究的這個最後術語,研究靈魂的前幾次悸動,所發生的事情—你們看到陽具,譬如,在被辨認的最後術語,用原始的攻擊性的力量。在母親子宮裡面最後邂逅的最糟糕的客體, 而且,那是最危險的客體。

Why this ubiquity? I am not the one who introduces it here, who
suggests it, it is everywhere manifest in the writings of any attempt pursued to formulate on an old plane as well as on a new, renovated one of analytic technique.

為什麼有這個無所不在? 我並不是在從介紹它,建議它的人,它出現在任何這種企圖的著作裡。這些企圖曾經被追求,為了要從古老及新的層次說明,一種精神分析技術被革新。

Well, let us try to put some order in it and to see why it is necessary for me to insist on this ambiguity, or on this polarity if you wish, polarity with two extreme terms, the symbolic and the imaginary, concerning the function of the signifier phallus.

呵呵,讓我們嘗試將它整理一下,並且看出為什麼我需要堅持這個曖昧性, 或是堅持這個極端性,帶有兩個極端術語的極端, 象徵界與想像界,關於能指的陽具的功用。

I say signifier in so far as it is used as such but when I speak about it, when I introduced it above, I said the symbol phallus and, as you will see, it is perhaps in effect the only signifier which merits, in our register and in an absolute fashion, the title of symbol.

我說的是能指,因為它本身被使用,但是當我談論關於它,當我以上介紹它, 我說,陽具的象徵符號,你們將會看出, 或許事實上,它是唯一獲得象徵符號頭銜的能指,在我們銘記及以絕對的方式。

I have therefore unveiled again this image (which undoubtedly is not the simple reproduction of the original one of the artist) of the painting from which I began as the properly speaking exemplary image, which appeared to me to be charged in its composition with all the sorts of riches that a certain art of painting can produce and whose Mannerist principle I examined.

我因此再一次揭露這個圖畫的意象,( 無可置疑的,這並不是對於藝術家原創意象的簡單的複製)。從那裡,我開始,作為適當地說是典範的意象。我覺得這個意象在它的構成本質,稟賦有某種圖畫的藝術能夠產生各種的豐富,我檢視過它的格調主義的原理。

I am going to pass it around again rapidly, if only for those who
were not able to see it.


I wish simply, and by way I could say of a complement, to clearly mark, for those who perhaps were not able to understand in a precise fashion, what I intend to underline about the importance here of what I would call the Mannerist application. You are going to see that the application must be employed moreover in the proper sense as well as in the figurative sense.

我僅是希望,憑藉我能夠說的補充, 為了清楚地標示,對於可能不能夠明確瞭解的那些人,對於我打算要強調的, 關於我所謂的格調主義的應用的重要性。 你們將會看次, 這個應用被實施,必須以適當的意義,及以比喻的意義。

It is not I but studies which already exist which have made the rapprochement in this painting between the use that is given by the presence of the bouquet of flowers here in the foreground…. it covers what is to be covered which I told you was less again the threatened phallus
than Eros surprised and uncovered here through an initiative of the question of Psyche: “What is there to be said about him? De lui qu’en est-il?.”

並不是我,而是已經存在的研究,將在這幅圖畫裡的友善關係,在前景的花束的存在給予的用途—它蓋住了應該被蓋住的東西, 我告訴你們,這個東西並不是受到威脅的陽具, 而是厄洛斯性愛之神,在此受到驚喜及揭露,通過賽奇女神的問題的創議:「關於他,有什麼能夠被說?」


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: