Ethic 134

Ethic 134
The Ethics of Psychoanalysis
精神分析伦理学

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康
χ Marginal comments
第十章 边缘的评论

ANAMORPHOSIS AND ARCHITECTURE
变形与艺术

THE PRIMACY OF THE ES
Es 的原初性

3
Neither science nor religion is of a kind to save the Thing or to give it to us,
because the magic circle that separates us from it is imposed by our relation
to the signifier. As I have told you, the Thing is that which in the real suffers
from this fundamental, initial relation, which commits man to the ways of
the signifier by reason of the fact that he is subjected to what Freud calls the
pleasure principle, and which, I hope it is clear in your minds, is nothing else
than the dominance of the signifier – I, of course, mean the true pleasure
principle as it functions in Freud.

科学与宗教均非是合适种类,来拯救这个物象,或是将它给予我们。因为分开我们跟物象的这个魔术圈,是由我们跟跟能指的关系所赋加。如同我曾经告诉过你们,这个物象是在实在界遭受这个基本的最初的关系的痛苦的东西。这个关系让人类奉献于能指的方式,凭借这个事实:他隶属于弗洛依德所谓的快乐原则。我希望你们心里明白,这个关系实实在在就是这个能指的支配。当然,我指的是真实的快乐原则,依照它在弗洛依德充当的功用。

In brief, it is the effect of the influence of the signifier on the psychic real
that is involved, and it is for this reason that the activity of sublimation is not
purely and simply senseless in all its forms – one responds with whatever is
at hand.

总之,牵涉到的就是这个能指的影响对于心灵实在界的效应。因为这个理由,升华的活动并不单纯在各个形式上无意义。我们用任何我们用得到的东西来回应。

I wanted to have here today, so as to be able to show it to you at the end
of the Seminar, an object that to be understood, if not to be described, demands
a long commentary on the history of art. That one managed to construct such
an object and to find pleasure in it requires that we make a significant detour.
I will describe it to you. It is an object that embodies an anamorphosis. I
assume that many of you know what that is. It is any kind of construction
that is made in such a way that by means of an optical transposition a certain
form that wasn’t visible at first sight transforms itself into a readable image.
The pleasure is found in seeing its emergence from an indecipherable form.
Such a thing is extremely widespread in the history of art. Just go to the
Louvre; you will see Holbein’s painting of The Ambassadors and at the feet
of one of the two men, who is just as well built as you or I, you will see an
enigmatic form stretched out on the ground. It looks roughly like fried eggs.
If you place yourself at a certain angle from which the painting itself disappears
in all its relief by reason of the converging lines of its perspective, you
will see a death’s head appear, the sign of the classic theme of vanitas. And
this is found in a proper painting, a painting commissioned by the ambassadors
in England, who must have been very pleased with his work; and what
was at the bottom must have amused them a lot, too.

为了要在这个研讨班结束时,能够跟你们显示它,今天在此我想要拥有一个目标。为了被理解,估且不说是被描述,这个目标要求对于艺术的历史从事漫长的评论。我们成功于建构这样一个目标,并且在它里面找到快乐,要求我们应该从事一个重要的迂迴。我将跟你们描述它。这一个目标具体表现一个变形图像。我假定你们许多人都知道那个变形图像是什么。这是任何种类的建构以这样一种方式形成。凭借着视觉的调换,乍然一看,某种无法看见的形式,转变自己成为可阅读的意象。这种快乐被找到,当我们看见它以无法解释的形式出现。在艺术的历史上,这样一种事情是极端广泛的。你们只要前往罗浮宫,你们就会发现霍宾的「大使」画像。在两位大使的其中一位,他们跟你们或我一样身体魁梧。你们将会看出一个谜团一般的形状伸展在地上。它看起来有点像是煎蛋。假如你们放在自己处于某个角度,从那个角度,图像本身消失,以它所有的浮雕,由于它的透视法的汇集的线条。你们将会看见一个死人的头颅出现。这是「浮世绘」vanitas 的古典的主题的迹象。在典型的浮世绘图画都可发现,在英国,大使们委任的一幅图像。这些大使当时对他的作品一定非常满意。对于图像底端的东西,他们一定也颇感興趣。

This phenomenon is datable. It was in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries
that things reached this point of heightened interest and even of fascination.
In a chapel built by order of the Jesuits in Descartes’s time, there
existed a whole wall some eighteen meters long that represented a scene from
the life of the saints or a nativity scene, and that was completely unreadable
from any point in the room, but if one entered by a certain corridor, you can
see for a brief moment the extraordinarily dispersed lines come together and
perceive the body of the scene.

这种现象可找出时期。那是在十六与十七世纪,事情到达强烈興趣,甚至是著迷的这个时期。在笛卡尔的时代,耶稣教会所建造的一所小教堂,存在着一整个墙壁,大约十八公尺长,呈现圣人的生活场景,或自然场景。从房间的任何角度,都完全无法览阅,但是假如我们从某个走道进入,你能够瞬间看见这个特别扩散的线条聚集一块,然后感受到这个场景的实体。

The anamorphosis I wanted to bring here is much less voluminous. It belongs
to the collector I have already referred to. It is formed of a polished cylinder
that has the function of a mirror, and around it you put a kind of bib or flat
surface on which there are also indecipherable lines. When you stand at a
certain angle, you see the image concerned emerge in the cylindrical mirror;
in this case it is a beautiful anamorphosis of a painting of the crucifixion
copied from Rubens.

我在此想要带来的这个变形,比较没有那么龐大。它属于我已经提到的那位收集家。它由一个光滑的圆筒所形成,这个圆筒拥有镜子的功用。环绕它,你们放置一种围布或平坦的表面。在它们上面,也有无法解释的线条。当你们站在某个角度,你们看见这个相关的意象出现在那个圆筒的镜子。在这种情况,这是一种耶稣钉上十字架的美丽的图像的变形,从鲁宾森仿真而来。

This object could never have been produced, never have had a necessary
meaning without a whole preceding development. There is behind it the whole
history of architecture as well as that of painting, their combination and the
history of this combination.

这个目标本来永远无法被产生,它本来无法拥有必须的意义,假如没有先前的整个历史的发展。在它背后是这整个的建筑的历史,以及图画的历史。它们的组合以及这种组合的历史。

To put it briefly, primitive architecture can be defined as something organized
around emptiness. That is also the authentic impression that the forms of a cathedral like Saint Mark’s give us, and it is the true meaning of all architecture. Then subsequently, for economic reasons, one is satisfied with
painting images of that architecture, one learns to paint architecture on the
walls of architecture; and painting, too, is first of all something that is organized
around emptiness. Since it is a matter of finding once more the sacred
emptiness of architecture in the less marked medium of painting, the attempt
is made to create something that resembles it more and more closely, that is
to say, perspective is discovered.

简短地说,原始的建筑能够被定义为某件环绕空无组织的东西。那也是像圣马可的大教堂的形态给予我们的真实的印象。那是所有的建筑的真实的意义。因此随后,因为经济的理由,我们满足于那个建筑的图画的意象。我们学习绘画建筑在建筑的墙壁上。图画首先也是某件被组织环绕空无的东西。因为问题是要再次找出建筑的这个神圣的空无,在比较没有那么明显的图画的媒体,从事这种企图,是为了创造某件东西,更加仔细地类似它,换句话说,透视法被发现。

The following stage is paradoxical and quite amusing; it shows how one
strangles oneself with one’s own knots.

以下的阶段是矛盾,而且相当有趣。它显示为们如何用自己的环结勒死自己。

From the moment when perspective was discovered in painting, a form of
architecture appears that adopts the perspectivism of painting. Palladio’s art,
for example, makes this very obvious. Go and see Palladio’s theater in Vicenze,
a little masterpiece of its kind that is in any case instructive and exemplary.
Neoclassical architecture submits itself to the laws of perspective, plays with
them, and makes them its own. That is, it places them inside of something
that was done in painting in order to find once again the emptiness of primitive
architecture.

从透视法在图画中被发现的那个时刻开,一种採用图画透视法的建筑的形式出现,譬如,帕拉迪欧的艺术,让这点被凸显出来。请你们前去维琴察的帕拉迪欧戏院,无论如何,属于它那种的一点小杰作具有启发性及典范性。新古典的建筑屈从于透视法的法则,玩弄它们,并且将它们据为己有。换句话说,它将它们放置在用图画做的某件东西里面,为了再次找到原始建筑的空洞。

From that point on one is entangled in a knot which seems to flee increasingly
from the meaning of this emptiness. And I believe that the Baroque
return to the play of forms, to all manner of devices, including anamorphosis,
is an effort to restore the true meaning of artistic inquiry; artists use the
discovery of the property of lines to make something emerge that is precisely
there where one has lost one’s bearings or, strictly speaking, nowhere.

从那点开始,我们被纠缠在一个似乎逐渐逃离这个空洞的意义的环结。我相信,巴洛克回答形式的遊戏,回到各色各样的设计,包括变形。这个回转是一种努力要恢复艺术的探究的真实的意义,艺术家使用线条的特性的发现,让某件东西出现。这个东西确实在我们已经丧失关联的那里,或严格地说,在空无之处。

Rubens’ painting that suddenly appears in the place of the unintelligible
image reveals what is at issue here. At issue, in an analogical or anamorphic
form, is the effort to point once again to the fact that what we seek in the
illusion is something in which the illusion as such in some way transcends
itself, destroys itself, by demonstrating that it is only there as a signifier.
And it is this which lends primacy to the domain of language above all,
since with language we only ever have to do with the signifier in all cases.
That is why in raising the problems of the relationship of art to sublimation,
I will begin with courtly love. One finds there texts which show in an exemplary
way its conventional side, in the sense that language always involves
artifice relative to anything intuitive, material or lived.

鲁宾森的图画突然出现在无法理解的意象的位置,显示在此受到争议的东西。受到争议的是这种努力,以一种类比或变形的形式,努力要再一次指向这个事实:我们在幻想所寻求的东西,是某件东西那里,这个幻想本身以某种方式超越它自己,毁灭它自己,凭借证明,它仅有在那里,作为一个能指。就是这个能指,特别借助原初性,给于语言的领域。因为使用语言,我们无论在任何情况,都仅会跟这个能指有关系。那就是为什么当我提出艺术跟升华的关系的这个问题,我将会开始从骑士之爱开始。我们在那里发现一些文本,以作为典范的方式,显示它的传统的面向。意义是:语言总是跟技艺有关,相对于任何直觉,材料或生活过得东西。

This phenomenon is all the more striking since we see it develop at a period
of uninhibited fucking. I mean that they didn’t attempt to hide it, didn’t
mince their words.

这个现象更加引人注意,因为我们看见它发展,在纵情欢爱的高潮。我的意思是,他们并没有企图隐藏它,并没有委婉他们的话语。

The coexistence of two styles on the subject is the remarkable thing.
You introduce the idea of the Thing and the Non-Thing. It is, if you like,
true that the Thing is also the Non-Thing. In reality, the Non- as such is
certainly not individualized in a significant way. Exactly the same problem is
posed by the Freudian notion of Todestrieb, whereas Freud tells us at the
same time that there is no negation in the unconscious.

在主体身上, 两种风格的共存是明显的事情。你们介绍物象与这个「非存在物象」的这个观念。不妨说,这个物象确实是「非存在物象」。实际上,这个「非存在」的本身,确实没有以重要的方式个体化。确实是相同的问题被提出,作为浮洛依德的死亡冲动Todestrieb 的观念。虽然浮洛依德同时告诉我们,在无意识并没有否定。

We don’t make a philosophy out of it. I remind you of the notion that I
modified the other day, so as not to give the impression that I don’t accept
my responsibilities: when I talk about the Thing, I am certainly talking about
something. But I am, of course, talking operationally, with reference to the
place that it occupies in a certain logical stage of our thought and of our
conceptualization, with reference to its function in what concerns us.

我们并没有将死亡冲动形成一门哲学。我提醒你们这个观念,我前天修正的这个观念。为了不要给予这个印象: 我没有接受我的责任,当我谈论这个物象。我确实是谈论到某件东西。但是当然,我是运作性地谈论,提到它佔据的位置,以我们思想与我们的观念的某个逻辑的阶段,提到它的功用,在跟我们相关的东西。

Yesterday evening I referred to and denounced the substitution for Freud’s
whole classic topology of the term “ego” – something that is particularly
regrettable in someone as deeply immersed in analytical thought as Spitz.
It is indeed difficult to recognize in that concept the essential function with
which analytical experience began, that was its shock value as well as its echo
and suite. Let us not forget that Freud, in effect, immediately countered it
with the invention of the term das Es. That primacy of the Es is now completely
forgotten.

昨天晚上,我提到并且抨击,弗洛依德的整个的古典的「自我」这个术语的拓扑图形的升华。这是某件特别令人遗憾的东西,在某人身上,作为是深深陶醉于像史匹兹的精神分析的思想。这确实是困难的,要在那个观念体认出这个基本的功用,精神分析经验以它作为开始的功用,那就是它的惊吓价值,以及它的迴响与配套。让我们不要忘记,实际上,弗洛依德立即反驳它,用「本我das Es.」的这个术语的杜撰。这个本我Es」 优先性现在完全被忘记。

To some extent, the Es is not sufficiently emphasized by the way it is
presented in the texts of the second topic. It is to remind us of the primordial
and primary character of this intuition in our experience at the level of ethics
that this year I am calling a certain zone of reference “the Thing.”

到某个程度,这个本我Es并没有充分地被强调,由于它被呈现的方式,在第二个议题的文本里。那是要提醒我们,在我们精神分析经验的伦理学层次,这个直觉具有原初与初级的特性。今年,我将称某个指称的地区,为这个「物象」。

Mr. Laplanche: I would like to ask a further question on the relationship of
the pleasure principle to the play of the signifier.

拉普兰奇先生:我想要询问一个更深入的问题,关于快乐原则与能指的遊戏的关系?

This relationship is founded on the fact that the pleasure principle basically
involves the sphere of investment, Besetzung, and its Bahnungen, and it is
facilitated by the Vorstellungen and even more by what Freud calls the Vorstellungsreprasentanzen- a term that appears very early, before the article on
the Unconscious. Each time a state of need arises, the pleasure principle tends
to provoke a reinvestment in its content – in inverted commas, that is, since
at this metapsychological level clinical practice is not involved – an hallucinated
reinvestment of what had previously been a satisfying hallucination.

这个关系的基础是这个事实:快乐原则基本上牵涉到投注佔领Besetzung的领域,及其神经的便利Bahnungen 。这是由于想象Vorstellungen 给予的便利,甚至是由于弗洛依德所谓的幻想再现 Vorstellungsreprasentanzen。这一个术语出现很早,在探讨无意识的文章之前。每次,一种需要的状态出现,快乐原则就倾向于召唤一种重新投注于它的内容,用倒转的引号。换句话说,因为在形上心理学的层次,临床的实践并没有被牵涉–一种幻觉化的重新投注,对于先前曾经令人满足的幻觉的东西。

The diffuse energy of the pleasure principle tends toward this reinvestment
of representation. The intervention of the reality principle can only therefore
be a radical one; it is never a second stage. Naturally, there is no adaptation
to reality that doesn’t involve a phenomenon of tasting, of sampling, by means
of which the subject manages to monitor, one might almost say with his
tongue, that which enables him to be sure that he isn’t dreaming.

快乐原则的丰沛能源倾向于这种符号再现的重新投注。现实原则的重新投注因此仅会上一个强烈的投注。它永远不是一个第二阶段。当然,对于现实的适应,并没有牵涉到品尝,样品的现象。凭借这个现象,主体成功地监控,我们几乎要用他的语言说,让他能够确定他并不是正在做梦的东西。

This is what constitutes the originality of Freud’s thought and no one,
moreover, has been mistaken about that. It is both paradoxical and provocative.
Before Freud no one has ever dared articulate the functioning of the
psychic apparatus in that way. He describes it on the basis of his experience of the irreducible element he saw emerge at the core of hysterical substitutions;
the first thing that poor, defenseless man can do when he is tortured
by need is to begin to hallucinate his satisfaction, and after that he can only
monitor the situation. Fortunately, he more or less makes at the same time
the gestures required to attach himself to the zone in which this hallucination
coincides with the real in an approximative form.

这是形成弗洛依德的思想的原创性的东西,而且,对于那一点,每个人都确定无疑。那既是矛盾,有具有挑衅性。在弗洛依德之前,没有人曾经胆敢以那镇方式表达心灵工具的功用。他描述它,根据他看见的经验:无法还原的元素,从歇斯底里症的替换的核心出现。那位可怜的,无法防卫的人所能够做到第一件事,当他被需要所折磨,就是开始幻想他的满足。在此之后,它仅能够监控这个情况。幸运地,他同时表现出被要求的姿态,为了跟这个地区连系。在这个地区,这个幻觉跟实在界巧合,以大约的形式。

If the basic texts are to be respected, that’s the miserable beginning from
which the whole dialectic of experience is articulated in Freudian terms. That’s
what I told you when I discussed the relationship between the pleasure principle
and the signifier.

假如这些基本的文本应该被尊敬,那是这个悲惨的开始。从这个开始,精神分析经验的整个的辩证法用弗洛依德的术语被表达。那就是我告诉你们的东西,当我讨论快乐原则跟这个能指的关系。

Thus the Vorstellungen have right from the beginning the character of a
signifying structure.

因此这个想象Vorstellungen 从一开始,就拥有能指的结构的这个特性。

雄伯译
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: