Encore 24

Encore 24
繼續再來
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

VI
God and Woman’s jouissance
上帝及女人的歡爽

3
Be careful with this “more” – beware of taking it too far too quickly. I cannot designate it any better or otherwise because I have to rough it out (trancher)?3 and I have to go quickly.

請小心這個「尚欠缺」–小心不要一下子就過分引申。我無法用更恰當或別的方式表達,因為我必須當下立斷。我必須快刀斬亂麻。

There is a jouissance, since I am confining myself here to jouissance,34 a jouissance of the body that is, if I may express myself thus – why not makea book title out of it? it’ll be the next book in the Galilee collection – “beyond the phallus.” That would be cute, huh? And it would give another consistency to the women’s liberation movement. A jouissance beyond the phallus. . . .

尚欠缺一種歡爽。因為我目前限制自己先談歡爽,身體的歡爽—假如我容許我自己這樣表達—為什麼不用它來當書名?那會上伽利立文集的下一本書名:「超越陽具」。那個書名很酷,不是嗎? 那會讓女性解放運動,具有另一種一致性。超越陽具的歡爽…

You may have noticed – I am naturally speaking here to the few semblances of men I see here and there, fortunately I don’t know them for the most part, and that way I don’t presume anything about the others – that now and then, there is something that, for a brief moment, shakes (secoue) women up or rescues them (secourt).

你們可能已經注意到—我在此言說,當然是針對我在此及在那兒看到少數類似的人。幸運地,他們大部分,我並不認識。因此我對於其餘的人,並沒有預先有成見。你們可能已經注意到,有時,會有某件東西,短暫時間顛覆女人,或拯救她們。

When you look up the etymology of those two words in the Bloch et Von Wartburg that is so delectable to me, and that I am sure you don’t even all have on your bookshelves, you’ll see the relationship between them.35 Such things don’t happen by chance, all the same.

當你們在我覺得很有趣的「範瓦布格」詞典,查閱這兩個字的字源,我確定並不是你們所有人在書架上都有這本書。你們將會看出它們之間的關係。可是,這些事情並不是偶然發生。

There is a jouissance that is hers (à elle), that belongs to that “she” (elle) that doesn’t exist and doesn’t signify anything.36 There is a jouissance that is hers about which she herself perhaps knows nothing if not that she experiences it – that much she knows. She knows it, of course, when it comes (arrive). It doesn’t happen (arrive) to all of them.

有一種屬於女人的歡爽,屬於並不存在,也並不意味著任何東西的「女人」的歡爽。有一種屬於女人的歡爽,關於這個女人的歡爽,女人自己或許根本就不知道這種歡爽,假如她沒有經驗到它—她知道得很清楚。當然,她知道這種歡爽,當歡爽來臨時。並不是所有的女人都會有這種歡爽。

I don’t want to end up talking about putative frigidity, but one must isolate that aspect of relationships between men and women that is related to current trends (la mode). It’s very important. Of course in Freud’s discourse, alas, as in courtly love, all of that is covered over by minute considerations that have led to all kinds of problems {ravages). Minute considerations concerning clitoral jouissance and the jouissance that people call by whatever name they can find, the other one, precisely, the one that
I am trying to get you to approach by a logical pathway, because, as things currently stand, there is no other.

我並不想要結語時跟你們談論想像中的人際的冷漠。但是我們必須將跟目前時代潮流相關的男女之間的關係,突顯出來。這是非常重要的。當然,在佛洛德的論述,呵呵,如同在騎士之愛,所有這一切都被一些微細的問題所掩蓋。它們導致各種的問題。關於陰蒂及人們各以其名稱呼的歡爽的微細的考量,有另外一種歡爽,確實地說,就是我正在嘗試以邏輯的途徑引導你們接近的歡爽,因為如同事情的目前狀態,並沒有其它的歡爽。

The plausibility of what I am claiming here – namely, that woman knows nothing of this jouissance – is underscored by the fact that in all the time people have been begging them, begging them on their hands and knees – I spoke last time of women psychoanalysts – to try to tell us, not a word!

我在這裡宣稱的東西的合理性—換句話說,女人對於這個歡爽一無所知—根據這個事實作為強調:有始以來,人們一直在乞求她們,在地上跪爬著乞求她們。上一次我談論到女人的精神分析嘗試要告訴我們的,但不是用文字!

We’ve never been able to get anything out of them. So we call this jouissance by whatever name we can come up with, “vaginal,” and speak of the posterior pole of the uterine orifice and other such “cunt-torsions” {conneries) – 70 that’s the word for it! If she simply experienced it and knew nothing about it, that would allow us to cast myriad doubts on this notorious {fameuse) frigidity.

我們永遠沒有辦法從她們那裡獲得任何東西。所以,我們稱呼這個歡爽,以我們所能夠想到的名稱,「陰道歡爽」,然後談論到尿道口的後面部分,以及其它諸如「陰戶扭轉」–那就是表達歡爽的字詞。假如她僅是經驗到它,卻什麼都不知道。那會讓我們給予無數的懷疑,對於這種惡名昭彰的冷漠無感。

That too is a theme, a literary theme. And it’s worth dwelling on for a moment. I’ve been doing nothing but that since I was twenty, exploring the philosophers on the subject of love. Naturally, I didn’t immediately focus on the question of love, but that did dawn on me at one point, with the
abbot Rousselot, actually, whom I mentioned earlier, and the whole quarrel about physical love and ecstatic love, as they are called.37

那也是一個主題,一個文學的主題。它值得我們詳述一下子。我什麼事情都沒做,但是我自從二十歲以來,就一直探索哲學家對於愛的討論。當然,我並沒有立刻集中在愛的問題。但是在某個時刻,實際上是由於我早先提到的羅色洛特修道院長的啟發,我恍然大悟。如同它們所被稱呼的,關於生理上的愛與精神狂喜的愛。

I understand why Gilson didn’t find that opposition to be a very good one.38 He thought that Rousselot had made a discovery that wasn’t really one, because that opposition was part of the problem, and love is just as ecstatic in Aristotle’s work as in Saint Bernard’s,39 assuming one knows how to read the chapters regarding çikia, friendship.

我瞭解到為什麼紀爾森並不認為那種對立是很好的對立。他認為羅色洛特所做的發現並不真的是愛。因為那種對立,是問題的一部分。在亞裡斯多德的著作,如同在聖伯納德著作,愛僅是精神狂喜,假如我們知道如何閱讀有關「友誼」的章節。

Some of you must surely know what literary debauchery occurred around that: Denis de Rougemont – have a look at Love in the Western World,40 it gets red hot! – and then another no stupider than anyone else, named Nygren, a Protestant, [the author of] Agape and Eros.41 Christianity naturally ended up inventing a God such that he is the one who gets off (jouii)\

你們有一些人確實知道環繞那個主題,文學的放縱情色是如何發生。勞紀曼觀看「西方世界之愛」,那本書變得很熱門!還有另外一位,也是同樣的癡迷,名字叫做乃格寧,一位基督教徒,是「驚奇與愛神」的作者。基督教結束時,當然都會發明一位元上帝,上帝是發生性的關係的人。

There is, nevertheless, a little connection when you read certain serious authors, like women, as if by chance. I will give you a reference here to an author, a reference I owe to a very nice person who had read the author’s work and brought it to me. I read it immediately. I’d better write her name on the board, otherwise you won’t buy it. It is Hadewijch d’Anvers, a Beguine – she is what we so quaintly refer to as a mystic.42

可是,有一個小小的關聯,當你們閱讀某些嚴肅的作者,譬如女性的作者,好奇偶然地。我在此將給予你們一種指稱,給一位作者,一個指稱,我歸功於某個好人,他曾經閱讀這位作者的著作然後帶來給我。我立刻閱讀它。我最好寫下她的名字在黑板上,否則你們不會去買它。她的名字是Hadewijch d’Anvers 一位貝居安修會修女—我們很奇特地提到她,作為一位神秘主義者。

I don’t use the word “mystic” as Peguy did.43 Mysticism isn’t everything that isn’t politics. It is something serious, about which several people inform us – most often women, or bright people like Saint John of the Cross, because one is not obliged, when one is male, to situate oneself on
the side of VxΦx.

不像皮蓋,我沒有使用「神秘主義者」這個字詞。神秘主義並非跟政治完全沒有關係。那是某件嚴肅的事情。關於神秘主義,有幾個人告訴我們,大部分是女人,或是一些聰明的人,像十字架會的聖約翰,因為我們的立場是男性,我們不得不定位我們自己在「陽具就是全部」的這一邊。

One can also situate oneself on the side of the not-whole. There are men who are just as good as women. It happens. And who also feel just fine about it. Despite – I won’t say their phallus – despite what encumbers them that goes by that name, they get the idea or sense that there must be a jouissance that is beyond. Those are the ones we call mystics.

我們也能夠定位我們自己在這個「並非全部」的那一邊。有些男人跟女人同樣的美好。偶爾是這樣。他們對於這個「並非全部」也感覺很自在。儘管—我將不說是他們的陽具—儘管使用那個名字會他們受到阻礙,他們有這個觀念,或感覺到,一定會有一個超越的歡爽存在。那些就是我們所謂的神秘主義者。

I have already spoken about other people who were not too bad in terms of mysticism, but who were situated instead on the side of the phallic function, Angelus Silesius, for example.44 Confusing his contemplative eye with the eye with which God looks at him, must, if kept up, partake of perverse
jouissance.

我已經談論過其它的人,用神秘主義的術語來說,他們並不太差勁。但是他們被定位,並不是在陽具的功用這一邊。譬如,希列西斯。他混淆他的沉思的眼神跟上帝觀看他的眼神,持之以恆,會讓他分享到倒錯的歡爽。

For the Hadewijch in question, it’s like for Saint Teresa – you need but go to Rome and see the statue by Bernini45 to immediately understand that she’s coming. There’s no doubt about it. What is she getting off on? It is clear that the essential testimony of the mystics consists in saying that they experience it, but know nothing about it.

對於受到質疑的海得維奇,就像聖德瑞莎—你們僅是需要到羅馬,去看看波敏尼雕塑的「聖德瑞莎的狂喜」雕像,你們就會立刻瞭解,她的歡爽高潮快要來了。這是無可置疑的事情。她正在跟誰從事性的關係?顯而易見地,神秘主義的重要證詞在於說:他們經驗到這種歡爽,但是卻不知道它。

These mystical jaculations are neither idle chatter nor empty verbiage; they provide, all in all, some of the best reading one can find – at the bottom of the page, drop a footnote, “Add to that list Jacques Lacan’s Écrits” because it’s of the same order. Thanks to which, naturally, you are all going to be convinced that I believe in God. I believe in the jouissance of woman insofar as it is extra (en plus), as long as you put a screen in front of this “extra” until I have been able to properly explain it.

這些神秘主義的射精,既非無聊的閒談,也非空洞的冗詞。終而言之,他們供應某種我們能夠找到的最好的讀物—在書頁的末尾,你們留下一個註腳:「將雅克拉康的精神分析論文集,列入那個名單」,因為彼此屬於相同的層次。當然,由於這個相同層次,你們將會相信,我信仰上帝。我相信女人的歡爽,因為上帝是額外存在的,只有你們在這個「額外存在」之前,你們擺放一層簾幕,直到我能夠適當地解釋它。

What was attempted at the end of the last century, in Freud’s time, what all sorts of decent souls around Charcot and others were trying to do, was to reduce mysticism to questions of cum (affaires de foutre). If you look closely, that’s not it at all. Doesn’t this jouissance one experiences and yet knows nothing about put us on the path of ex-sistence? And why not interpret one face of the Other, the God face, as based on feminine jouissance?

在佛洛德的時代,上個世紀的結束所做的企圖,環繞著查可特及其他人,各種名門正派嘗試所做的,就是要將神秘主義還原成為「射精」的問題。假如你仔細觀看,那根本就不是那麼一回事。我們經驗到,可是又一無所知的的這個歡爽,難道不是讓我們從事探討「外部存在」的途徑嗎?
為什麼我們不將大他者的一個面貌,上帝的面貌,解釋為以女性的歡爽作為基礎呢?

As all of that is produced thanks to the being of signifierness, and as that being has no other locus than the locus of the Other (Autre) that I designate with capital A, one sees the “cross-sightedness”46 that results. And as that is also where the father function is inscribed, insofar as castration is related
to the father function, we see that that doesn’t make two Gods (deux Dieu), but that it doesn’t make just one either.

由於人作為「能指」的生命實存,所被產生的一切,那個生命實存並沒有其它軌跡,除了就是大他者的軌跡。我用大寫字母「A」來表示,我們看到結果形成這個「散光視覺」。因為這就是父親的功用被銘記的地方,我們看到,那並沒有形成兩個上帝,而是它也沒有形成僅僅是一個上帝。

In other words, it’s no accident that Kierkegaard discovered existence in a seducer’s little love affair. It’s by castrating himself, by giving up love, that he thinks he will accede to it.47 But perhaps, after all – why not? – Regine too existed. This desire for a good at one remove (au second degré), a good
that is not caused by a little a – perhaps it was through Regine that he attained that dimension.
February 20, 1973

換句話說,齊克果在一位誘惑者的小小戀愛裡,發現上帝的存在,並非是偶然的。他閹割他自己,他放棄戀愛,他認為他將屈服於上帝的這個存在。但是,或許,畢竟—有何不可呢?他的戀人雷吉娜也存在呀。追求善待欲望就差那麼一步,追求並非由於一個小客體引起的善—或許,通過雷吉娜,他才獲得那個維度。

雄伯注:
「性的關係不存在」There is no sexual relationship 及「女人不存在」women don’t exist,「女人並非全部」women are not-whole or not-all 是拉康最令人困惑的幾個陳述,在這一篇裡,獲得比較請楚的一個解釋。

拉康所謂的「性關係不存在」,指的並非是一般男女的「性關係」,而是借用修道的神秘主義者的證詞:跟上帝的性靈互相的溝通,會獲得無限的永恆「狂喜」ecstasy。拉康把這種「狂喜」,用男女作愛的射精的歡爽來做換喻,變成人作為「陽具」的能指signierness,是跟作為「所指」signifiedness的上帝這個「女人」在做愛。所謂「女性的歡爽」,也就是上帝的歡爽,大他者the Other 的歡爽。

至於說「性關係不存在」,「女人不存在」,「女人並非全部」,是因為晚期拉康認為並非是上帝創造這個世界,而是人作為陽具的「能指」的想像界the imaginary 創造上帝,而「所指」也不再是被比喻為女人的「上帝」,或「大他者」,他們僅是實在界the Real的無意識the unconscious的空洞the role或空界 the void 的一部分,故非「全部」not-whole or not-all。

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: