精神错乱310a

精神错乱310a
The Psychosis

雅克、拉康
Jacques Lacan

XXV
The phallus and the meteor
第22章: 阳具与流星

PREVALENCE OF CASTRATION 阉割的盛行
IDA MACALPINE 艾达、马克派恩
NATURAL SYMBOLIZATION AND SUBLIMATION 自然的符号化与昇华
THE RAINBOW 彩虹
INSERTED IN THE FATHER 被插入于父权里

I’m not sure what to begin with to end this course. On the off chance, I’ve
put two small schemas on the board for you.

我不确定应该怎么开始,为了结束这个课程。尽我可能,我已经在黑板上跟你们提出两个基模。

The first is an old one. It’s a sort of grid which I used at the start of this
year to try to show you how the problem of delusion is raised if we want to
structure it insofar as it appears to be a relation in some way linked to speech.
The second of these schemas is entirely new and I will have occasion to refer
to it shortly.

第一个是旧的基模。这是一种框格,我在今年开始时使用,为了跟你们显示谵妄的问题如何被提出,假如我们想要架构它,因为它似乎是一种关系,在某方面,跟言说息息相关。这些基模的第二个完全是新颖的。我不久将有机会提到它。

1
What I have put forward this year has been centraUy concerned with placing
the emphasis back upon the structure of delusion. Delusion may be regarded
as a disturbance of the object relation and is therefore linked to a transference
mechanism. But I wanted to show you that all its phenomena, and I even
think I can say its dynamics, would be clarified in reference to the functions
and structure of speech. This will also free this transference mechanism from
all kinds of confused and diffuse object relations.

今年我曾经提出的,主要始终是关心将这个强调点,放置回到谵妄的结构。谵妄可能被认为是对客体关系的一种扰乱,因此跟移情的机械结构息息相关。但是我想要跟你们显示:所有它的现象将会被澄清,关于跟言说的这些功能与结构,我甚至能够说出它的动力学。

By hypothesis, whenever one deals with a disturbance regarded overall as
immature, one refers to a linear developmental series derived from the immaturity
of the object relation. Now, experience shows that this unilinearity
leads to impasses, to inadequate, unmotivated explanations that superimpose
themselves on one another in a way that does not enable cases to be differentiated
and, first and foremost, obliterates the difference between neurosis
and psychosis. The mere experience of partial delusion mitigates against
speaking of immaturity, or even of regression or simple modification of the
object relation.

根据假设,每当我们处理一种扰乱,全面性被认为是不成熟,我们提到一种直线的发展系列。这个发展系列从客体关系的不成熟获得。现在,精神分析经验显示: 这个单一直线性导致各种僵局,导致不充分,没有动机的各种解释。这些解释彼此预先涵盖,其方式并不能够让各种个案被区别。尤其重要的,它们抹除掉神经症与精神错乱的差异。光是客体谵妄动精神分析经验,就让不成熟之说难以成立,遑论倒退说或是客体的单纯修正说。

The same thing goes if one refers to the neuroses alone. Next year we shall
see that the notion of object relation isn’t univocal, when I begin by contrast-
ing the object of phobias with the object of perversions. This will be to take
up again, at the level of the category of object, the problem of the relations
between the subject and the other, two terms which, regarding the psychoses,
are opposed.

假如我们光是提到神经症的功能,相同的情况会发生。明年,我们将会看出,客体关系的这个观念并不是不容质疑的,当我开始对照恐惧的客体,跟各种倒错的客体。这将要再一次从事,在客体的这个范畴的层次,在主体与大他者之间的各种关系的问题,这两个互相对立的术语,关于精神错乱。

I left you last time with two opposed descriptions, Freud’s and that of a
psychoanalyst who is far from being without merit and, while representing
the most modern tendencies, has at least the advantage of doing so very intelligently.

我上次结束时,留下两个对立的描述,弗洛伊德的描述跟一位精神分析家的描述。这位精神分析并非乏善可陈。虽然他代表最现代的流行趋势,他至少拥有这个优势:表现得聪慧杰出。

Let’s briefly summarize Freud’s position on the subject of Schreber’s delusion
and the objections brought against him, and let’s see if anything like a
better solution has even begun to be outlined.

让我们简短总结弗洛伊德对于苏瑞伯的谵妄动这个主体的立场,以及被提出的对他的反对意见。让我们看出,是否有一个像是比较好的解决的东西,甚至已经开始被描绘轮廓。

For Freud, we’re told, Schreber’s delusion is linked to the irruption of a
homosexual tendency. The subject negates it, defends himself against it. In
his case, which isn’t the case of a neurotic, this negation ends in what we
might call divine erotomania.

我们听说,对于弗洛伊德,苏瑞伯的谵妄跟同性恋的倾向的发作息息相关。主体否定它,自己採取防卫,对抗同性恋的倾向。若是神经症的个案,则不会这样。这种否定结果会形成我们所谓的神圣的色情狂。

You know how Freud divides up the various denials [delegations] of the
homosexual tendency. He starts from a sentence that symbolizes the situation
– / love him, a man.1 There is more than one way of introducing denial into
this sentence. One may say for example, Its not I who love him or, Its not
him I love or again, For me there is no question of love, I hate him. Moreover,
he tells us, the situation is never simple and isn’t limited to a simple symbolic
reversal.

你们知道弗洛伊德如何区分对于同性恋倾向的各种各样的否认。他从一个象征这个情况的句子开始:「 我爱他,一位男人」。有不仅一种的方式来介绍否认,进入这个句子。我们可以说,譬如,「并不是我爱他」,或是「我爱的并不是他」,或是「对于我而言,无所谓爱的问题,我恨他」。而且,他告诉我,这个情况从来就不是单纯的,它并不限制于一种单纯的符号象征的倒转。

For reasons that he takes to be implied sufficiently, but upon which
as a matter of fact he doesn’t insist, an imaginary reversal of the situation
occurs in only a part of the three terms, namely / hate him is for example
transformed through projection into He hates me. In our case, Ifs not him I
love, its someone eke, a big He, God himself, is inverted into He loves me, as
in all erotomania. It is clear that Freud is indicating that the final result of
defense against the homosexual tendency can’t be understood in the absence
of a very advanced reversal of the symbolic apparatus.

为了他认为是充分被暗示的理由,但是事实上,他并没有坚持这些理由。一种想象的情况的倒转发送,在这三个术语的仅是早先的部分。换句话说,譬若,「我恨他」,通过投射被转换成为「他恨我」。 在我们苏瑞伯这个个案,「我爱的并不是他,而是某个其他人。」一个大写的「他」,上帝本身,被倒转成为「他爱我」,如同在所有色情狂。显而易见,弗洛伊德正在指示: 作为防卫对抗同性恋倾向的最后结果,无法被了解,由于符号象征的工具的深度倒转并没有出现。

Everything may therefore appear to revolve around defence. It must
undoubtedly be very intense indeed to propel the subject into trials that extend
to nothing less than the derealization, not only of the external world in general,
but of the very people around him, even those he is closest to, including
the other as such. This necessitates an entire delusional reconstruction, fol- 351
lowing which the subject gradually resituates, though in a profoundly disturbed
way, a world in which he is able to recognize himself, in an equally
disturbed way, as destined – at a time projected into the uncertainty of the
future, at a date that is indeterminate but that certainly cannot be delayed –
to become the subject par excellence of a divine miracle, that is, to be the
support and feminine receptacle of the recreation of all humanity. Schreber’s
delusion in its final state presents with all the megalomaniacal characteristics
of delusions of redemption in their most highly developed form.

每样东西似乎都绕着防卫旋转。无可置疑,那一定是非常强烈,确实是为了推动主体进入那些考验。那些考验延伸到实实在在就是这个除掉现实化,不但是一般外在世界的除现实化,甚至他靠近的那些外在世界,包括他者的本身。这让整个的谵妄动重建成为必要。遵照著这个重建,主体慢慢地重新定位他能够体认出他自己的世界,虽然是以非常受到困扰的方式。以一个同样受到困扰的方式,作为被注定的世界,在一段被投射到未来的不确定当中,处于一个不确定的日期,但是确实是无法被拖延的日期—为了成为一个神圣奇迹的这个优秀主体。换句话说,成为所有人类的创造的支持及女性的容器。苏瑞伯的谵妄,在它的最后的状态,呈现救赎的谵妄的夸大狂的各种特征,处于高度发展的形式。

How do we account for the intensity of the defense? Freud’s explanation
looks like it is contained entirely within the reference to narcissism. The
defence against the homosexual tendency begins with a narcissism under threat.
The megalomania represents that by which the narcissistic fear expresses itself.
The ego’s enlargement to the dimensions of the world is a fact of libidinal
economy which is apparently located entirely on the imaginary level. Making
himself the supreme being’s love object, the subject can henceforth abandon
that which, of all that he was going to save, initially seemed most precious to
him – namely the mark of his virility.

我们如何解释这种防卫的强度?弗洛伊德的解释看起来像是:它完全被包容在自恋的这个指称。对抗同性恋的倾向的这个防卫,开始于一种受到威胁的自恋。夸大狂代表,凭借着夸大狂,自恋的恐惧表达它自己,自我的括大到世界的各种维度,是力比多的活动力的事实。它显而易见完全被定位在想象的层次。让他自己成为崇高的爱的客体,主体因此能够放弃最初对他是珍贵的东西,在他将要拯救的所有的东西当中,换句话说,他的生命活力的标记。

But ultimately, and I stress this, the pivot, the point of convergence of the
libidinal dialectic that the mechanism and development of neurosis refer to
in Freud, is the theme of castration. It’s castration that conditions the narcissistic
fear. To accept castration the subject must pay as elevated a price as
this reworking of the whole of reality.

但是最后,我强调这点,这个枢纽,力比多辩证法的汇集的这个点。在弗洛伊德,神经症的机械结构及发展会提到它。那是阉割的主题,阉割制约了自恋的恐惧。为了接受阉割,主体必须付出同样高昂的代价,如同整个现实界的这个重建。

Freud stuck by this prevalence. In the material, explanatory order of
Freudian theory, from beginning to end, this is an invariable, a prevalent
invariable. He never subordinated or even relativized its place in the theoretical
conditioning of the subjective interplay in which the history of any psychoanalytic
phenomenon whatsoever is inscribed. It was around Freud, within
the analytic community, that one wanted to give it symmetrical or equivalent
things. But in his work the phallic object occupies the central place in libidinal
economy, in both man and woman.

弗洛伊德坚守这种的盛行。 在材料方面,弗洛伊德理论的解释性秩序,从头到尾,这是一个不变的东西,一个盛行的不变。他从来没有将它的位置隶属化,或相对化,在主体化的互相运作的理论制约。在这个互相运作里,任何精神分析现象的历史被铭记。就是环绕着弗洛伊德,在精神分析的社会里,我们想要给予它一些均称及相等的东西。但是在他的著作里,阳具的客体佔据这个中央的位置,在力比多的活动力,在男人与女人身上。

This is an altogether essential fact, characteristic of all the theorizing given
and maintained by Freud – whatever reworking he brought to his theorizing,
throughout all the phases of the schematization he was able to give of psychic
life, the prevalence of the phallic center was never modified.

这是一个非常基本的事实,表现出所有的理论化指称的特征,并且由弗洛伊德主张。他带给他的理论化的重新建构,在他能够给予的基模化的各个部分里面,关于心理的生活,这个阳具中心的盛行从来没有被修正。

If there is some truth in Mrs. Macalpine’s remarks – and this is however
352 the only thing that she doesn’t really make evident – it’s that, effectively, in
Schreber castration is never an issue. The Latin term that is used in German,
eviratio – Entmannung, means in the text transformation, with all that this
word conveys of transition, into a woman – it’s not castration at all.2 This
doesn’t matter, Freud’s analysis makes the entire dynamics of the subject
Schreber revolve around the theme of castration, of the loss of the phallic
object.

假如在马克派恩女士的谈论里,有某个真理—可是,这是她并没有真正让它明显化的唯一的东西。那就是,有效地,在苏瑞伯,阉割从来没有受到质疑。在德文里被使用的这个拉丁术语,eviratio—Entmannung,在文本里意味着转变成为女人,以及所有这个字词传递的转变的东西。这根本不是阉割。这并不重要,弗洛伊德的精神分析让苏瑞伯这个主体的整个动力活动,环绕着阉割的主题旋转,环绕着阳具客体的损失的主题。

We must remark that despite certain weaknesses in his argument, which
are due to the use of terms that only have their place in the imaginary dialectic
of narcissism, the virile object is the essential element at play in the conflict.
It alone enables us to make sense of and to understand the different
stages of the delusion’s evolution, its phases, and its final construction. Furthermore,
we may note in passing all sorts of subtleties that have not been
developed or completely explored.

我们必须谈论,他的主张尽管有某些的弱点,那是由于术语的使用,仅是在自恋的想象的辩证,获得地位,这个生命力的客体是这个基本的元素,在冲突中运作。光是它就让我们能够理解并且了解谵妄的进化的不同阶段,它的各个部分,以及它的最后的建构。而且,我们可能顺便注意到各种从来没有被发展或完整被探索的细微差异。

Freud shows us for example that projection
alone cannot explain delusion, that it is not a matter of a mirror image
of the subject’s feeling, but that it is indispensable to determine stages in it
and, at a certain moment as it were, a loss of the tendency, which ages. Over
the course of the year I have greatly insisted upon the fact that what has been
repressed within reappears without, re-emerges in the background – and not
in a simple structure but in a position that is, as it were, internal, which
makes the subject himself, who in the present case happens to be the agent
of persecution, ambiguous, problematic. He is initially only the representative
of another subject who not only permits but undoubtedly acts, in the
final analysis. In short, the otherness of the other is spread out. It’s one of
the problems to which as a matter of fact Freud does lead us, but he stops
there.

譬如,弗洛伊德跟我们显示:光是投射作用并无法解释谵妄,这并不是主体的感觉到镜子意象的问题,而是这是不可免除的,要决定在它里面的各个阶段,所谓的在某个时刻,这种倾向的丧失,它会成熟。在这年的期间,我曾经强烈地坚持这个事实:在里面被压抑的,会重新出现在外面,在背景里重新出现。不是在单一的结构,而是在一个所谓的内部的立场,它会使得主体的本身成为模糊暧昧,问题棘手。在目前的情况,这个主体本身恰巧会是迫害的代理人。他最初仅是另外一个主体的代表。这个主体不但包容,而且无可置疑地行动,在最后。总之,这个他者的异他性被广散开来。那是其中一个难题,事实上,弗洛伊德确实引导我们到那里。但是他适可而止。

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: