Archive for January, 2014

精神病 193

January 19, 2014

192 The hysteric’s question

Moreover, the feminized character of the subject’s discourse is so immediately
noticeable that when our analyst acquaints the subject with its major
elements, he obtains from him this remark which the doctor who examined
him had made to his wife – / fail to see whafs wrong with him. It seems that if
he were a woman I should understand him much better. He perceived the significant
aspect, but he didn’t perceive – for the simple reason that he didn’t
have the analytic apparatus, which is only conceivable in the register of the
structurations of language – that all this is only material, favorable material
admittedly, that the subject uses for expressing his question. Any other could
have been used just as easily, in order to express what is beyond any relation,
current or not current, a Who am I? a man or a woman? and Am I capable of
procreating?

而且,主体辞说的女性化的特性,立刻被注意到,以致于当我们的精神分析家让主体熟识这种女性化的因素时,他从主体那里获得这个谈论,检查他的医生对他的妻子表达的谈论:「我看不出他有什么毛病。似乎,假如他是女人,我会更加理解他。」医生感知到这个重要的层面,但是他并没有感知到。理由很简单,他并没有精神分析的工具,这种工具仅有在语言的结构组织的铭记里,才会被感知。所有这一切仅是材料,尽管是有利的材料,主体用这个材料来表达超越任何关系的东西,无论是目前的关系与否。「我是谁?男人或女人?我能够生小孩吗?」

Once one holds this clue, the subject’s entire life is reorganized from its
point of view. One mentions his anal preoccupations, for example. But what
does the interest he brings to his excrement revolve around? Around the
question of whether in his excrement there may be fruit seeds still capable of
growing if they’re buried in the ground.

一旦我们拥有这个线索,主体的整个的人生从这个线索的观点,就能够被体认出来。譬如,有一个线索提到他的口腔期的专注。但是他对于粪便的興趣,是绕着什么运转?这个興趣绕着这个问题:在他的粪便当中,会有水果的种子依旧能够成长,假如他们被埋在地上。

The subject has one great ambition, which is to be involved in raising
chickens and, more particularly, in the marketing of eggs. He is interested
in all sorts of botanical questions, all centered on germination. One may even
say that a whole series of accidents that happened to him during his job as
tram conductor is tied to the dismembering of the child he witnessed. This
is not the ultimate origin of the subject’s question, but it is a particularly
expressive。

这位主体具有一个很大的企图心。这个企图心应该牵涉到养鸡,更特别是,贩卖鸡蛋。他对各色各样的生物的问题感到興趣,全部都集中在生殖的问题。我们甚至说,在他作为电车车长的期间,他发生的一整个系列的意外,跟他见证到底小孩的肢离破碎有关。这并不是主体的问题的最终的起因。但是特别的印象鲜明。

Let’s finish where we began, with the last accident. He fell from the tram
which for him had become a significant machine, he fell down, he delivered
himself. The sole theme of a pregnancy fantasy dominates, but in what way?
As a signifier – the context makes this clear – of the question of his integration
into the virile function, into the function of the father. It may be noted
that he contrived to marry a woman who already had a child and with whom
he could only ever have inadequate relations.

让我们从外面开始的地方作为结束,用这个最后的意外。他从电车掉落下来。对于他而言,电车已经变成一个重要的机器。他掉落下来,他解脱他自己。怀孕幻想的单一主题支配一切,但是在哪一方面?文本内涵表达得很清楚–作为一个能指,他合并进入生殖功能的问题,合并进入父亲的功能的问题。我们可能注意到,他设法跟一位已经有小孩的女人结婚,可是他跟这个女人的关系,并不是很充分。

The problematic nature of his symbolic identification underlies any possible
understanding of the observation. Everything that’s said, expressed,
gestured, manifested, assumes its sense only as a function of a response that has to be formulated concerning this fundamentally symbolic relation – Am
I a man or am I a woman?

他在象征界的认同的特性问题重重,这是作为观察的可能理解的基础。每样被说出,被表达,被展现姿态,被展示的东西,仅有作为一种回应的功能,才具有它的意义。这种回应必须被诠释,关于这个基本上是象征的关系:「我是男人?还是女人?」

193

When I set things out for you like this, you can’t fail to compare it with
what I emphasized in the case of Dora. Where does she end up in fact, if not
confronted by a fundamental question on the subject of her sex? Not on what
sex she is, but What is it to be a woman? Dora’s two dreams are absolutely
transparent in this respect – one speaks of nothing else, What is it to be a
woman? and specifically, What is a feminine organ? Notice that here we find
ourselves before something odd – the woman wonders about what it is to be
a woman, just as the male subject wonders about what it is to be a woman.
We shall take things up from there next time. We shall highlight the dissymmetries
that Freud always stressed in the Oedipus complex, which confirm
the distinction between the symbolic and the imaginary that I have taken
up today.

当我像这样跟你们说明事情,你们一定会将它跟我在朵拉的个案所强调的东西相比较。事实上,朵拉结束的地方,难道不就是跟遭遇到一个基本的问题,在她的性的主体上?不是她是女人或男人的问题,而是这个主体应该成为女人吗?朵拉的两个梦在这个层面,绝对是透明的。其中一个梦谈论的并不是别的:「成为女人是个什么样子?」明确的是:「女性的起源是什么?」请你们注意,在此,我们发现我们自己面临某件古怪的东西—这个女人想要知道成为女人是什么?正如男性的主体想要知道成为女人是个什么样子。下一次,我们将从那里探索事情。我们将强调这些的不对称,弗洛依德在伊底浦斯情结总是强调的那些不对称。那些不对称证实这个区别,我今天探讨的象征界与想象界的区别。

For the woman, the realization of her sex is not accomplished in the Oedipus
complex in a way symmetrical to that of the man’s, not by identification
with the mother, but on the contrary by identification with the paternal object,
which assigns her an extra detour. Freud always stuck by this conception,
whatever people, women particularly, have since tried to do to re-establish
the symmetry. But the disadvantage the woman finds herself in with respect
to access to her own sexual identity, with respect to her sexualization as a
woman, is turned to her advantage in hysteria owing to her imaginary identification
with the father, who is perfectly accessible to her, particularly by
virtue of his position in the composition of the Oedipus complex.
For the man, on the other hand, the path is more complex.
14 March 1956

对于这位女人,她对于她的性别的体会并没有在伊底浦斯情结里完成。伊底浦斯情结在某个程度跟属于男人的情结相对称,而不是跟母亲的认同相对称。相反地,由于跟父亲的客体的认同,她被指定要从事特别的迂迴。弗洛依德总是坚持这个观念,不管是什么人们,特别是女人,从此尝试要从事来重建这个对称。但是关于要接近她自己的性的身份这方面,关于她的作为女人的性别化,女人发现她处于不利的地位。这种不利地位,在歇斯底里症,被转变成为有利地位,因为她想象认同于她的父亲。她的父亲是她完全可接近的。特别是凭借父亲在伊底浦斯情结的组成的立场。在另一方面,对于男人,这个途径是更加的复杂。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

精神病 189

January 18, 2014

精神病 189

 

3

I spoke to you of the Other of speech as being where the subject recognizes

himself and gets himself recognized. This, and not the disturbance of some

oral, anal or even genital relation, is the determining factor in a neurosis. We

are only too well aware how much trouble the handling of the homosexual

relation gives us, since we bring out its permanence in subjects who are diverse

at the level of instinctual relations. The issue here is a question that arises for

the subject at the level of the signifier, of the to be or not to be,1 at the level of

his being.

 

我跟你们谈论言说的大他者,作为是主体认出他自己,以及让他自己被认出的所在,。这就是神经症的决定性因素,而不是某个口腔期,或甚至是性器官期的困扰。我们非常清楚:处理同性恋时带给我们的困扰。因为我们揭露它的永久性,在本能的关系的层次,那些多样形态的主体。在此,这个问题是因为主体在能指的层次,所产生的问题。也是,在他生命实存的层次,面临生存或死亡」的问题。

 

I want to illustrate this for you with an example, an old observation of

traumatic hysteria—no trace of hallucinatory elements.

 

我想要使用一个例子跟你们说明这一点。这是对于创伤的歇斯底里症的旧的观察并没有幻觉因素的痕迹。

 

The reason I have chosen this one is that it brings into play, in the foreground,

this fantasy of pregnancy and procreation which dominates the history

of President Schreber, since this is where his delusion ends up, that a

new humanity, Schreberian in spirit, has to be re-engendered by him.

It concerns an observation we owe to Joseph Eisler, a psychologist of the

Budapest School, made at the end of the First World War, which recounts

the story of a chap who was a tram conductor during the Hungarian revolution.

 

我选择这个例子的理由是,它在前景运作怀孕与生殖的幻想。这种幻想在许瑞伯庭长的病史里处处可见。因为这是他的妄想结束的地方。在精神上,许瑞伯像是一种新的人类,必须要被他自己重新诞生。这关系到,我们必须将这个观察归功于约瑟夫、艾斯勒,布达佩斯学派的一位心理学家。这个学派在第一世界大战结束时成立。这个观察描述匈牙利革命期间,一位电车车长的故事。

2

He is thirty-three years of age, a Hungarian protestant – austerity, stability,

peasant tradition. He left his family to move to the city at the end of his

adolescence. His working life was marked by changes that were not without

meaning – he started out as a baker, then he worked in a chemical laboratory,

and finally he became a tram conductor. He used to ring the bell and punch

the tickets, but he had also been a driver.

 

他三十三岁,匈牙利的天主教徒严肃,稳重,农夫的传统。青春期结束时,他离开他的家庭,搬家到城市。他的工作的生活,标示着各种并非没有意义的改变。他开始时先是当麵包师,然后,他在一家化学实验室工作,最后,他成为电车车长。他过去常带着摇铃,检票打孔。但是他也是电车驾驶。

 

One day, alighting from his tram, he stumbled, fell, and was dragged a

short distance. He had some swelling and his left side hurt. He was taken to

hospital where they found that there was nothing wrong with him. He was

given a few stitches in the scalp to close the wound. Everything was fine. He

left after a thorough examination. They took a lot of x-rays, and they were

quite certain that there was nothing wrong with him. He had been putting

on a bit of a show.

 

有一天,当他从电车下来时,他绊了一跤,摔倒,被拖行了一段短距离。他的身体有些疼肿,左胁受伤。他被送到医院,在那里,医生发现他根本没有什么症状。他在头盖骨的地方被缝了几针,止住伤口。一切都还好。经过彻底检查之后,他离开。医生替他照了许多X光片,他们相当确定,他并没有什么症状。他一直在呈现各种展示。

 

And then, gradually, he fell victim to crises characterized by an increase

in pain in his lower rib, a pain that spread out from this point and drove the

subject into a state of increasing discomfort. He would stretch out, lie down

on his left side, use a pillow to block it. And things stayed that way, getting

worse as time went on. The crises would last several days, returning at regular

intervals. They kept getting worse, reaching the point of actually causing

the subject to lose consciousness.

 

然后,逐渐地,他成为各种危机的侵害,在他的肋骨的下方,逐渐疼痛起来。这个疼痛从这一点,扩展并且逼迫主体进入逐渐增加的不舒适的状态。他常常伸直身体,靠左边躺下,使用枕头塞著。这些危机延续好几天,规律的间隔复发。它们逐渐恶化,甚至实际上引起主体昏迷意识。

 

Once again he was given a thorough examination. They found absolutely

nothing. They suspected a traumatic hysteria and sent him to our author,

who analyzes him.

 

再一次,他给给予彻底检查。医生什么也没有找到。医生怀疑是创伤的歇斯底里症,并且送他到我们的作者,跟他作精神分析。

 

This man belongs to the first generation of analysts, he sees the phenomena

with a lot of freshness, investigates them from beginning to end. Nevertheless,

this observation dates from 1921 and already belongs to this type of

systematization that began to affect – correlatively, it would seem – observation

and practice and that would produce this turning point from which

the reversal that stressed the analysis of resistance emerged. Eisler is already

extremely impressed by the new ego psychology. On the other hand, he knows

the early things very well, Freud’s early analyses of the anal character, he

recalls the idea that the economic elements of the libido can play a decisive

role in the formation of the ego. And one feels that he is deeply interested in

his subject’s ego, in his style of conduct, in the things that indicate regressive

elements in him, insofar as they are inscribed not only in the symptoms but

also in the structure..

 

这个作者属于精神分析的第一代,他带着新奇地观看这个现象,从头到尾研究他。可是,这个观察从1921年开始,属于会影响观察与就医的这种的系统化(比较而言,似乎是这样),这种系统化常常产生这种转捩点,从那个转捩点,强调抗拒的精神分析的逆转就出现。艾斯勒对于这个新的自我心理学」已经印象非常深刻。在另一方面,他对于弗洛依德的口腔期的特性的早期分析,一切详情知道得一清二楚。他回想到这个观念:生命力比多的活动因素可能扮演决定性的角色,在自我的形成时期。我们感觉到,他对于主体的自我,行为的风格深感興趣。他发现病人身上具有许多东西指示著倒退的因素。因为它们被铭记,不仅是在他的病症里,而且在结构里。

 

His record of the subject’s curious behavior is very pertinent. At the end

of the first session the subject abruptly sits down on the couch and starts

looking at him with eyes like lottery balls, mouth agape, as if he has discovered

an unexpected and enigmatic monster. On other occasions the subject

gives some fairly surprising expressions to the transference. On one occasion

in particular he stands up abruptly and falls down again the other way round,

but with his nose against the couch, offering his dangling legs to the analyst

in a manner whose general meaning does not escape him.

 

他对于主体的奇异的行为的记录非常中肯。第一次就医结束时,主体突然坐在沙发上,然后开始看着他,眼睛像是彩卷的滚球,嘴巴张开,好像他已经发现一个令人惊奇的谜团的怪物。在其他场合,主体发出非常令人惊奇的表情,对于这种移情。特别是在有一个场合,他突然地站起来,再一次朝另外一边倒下。但是鼻子面向沙发,他的双脚朝着分析师垂下,这种方式的一般意义,分析家自然会注意到。

 

This subject is adapted well enough. His relations with his friends are

those of a militant unionist, he is something of a leader, and he is very interested

in what binds him to them socially. He enjoys undeniable prestige there.

Our author also particularly notes the way in which his being self-taught

functions, his papers are all in order. You can see that Eisler is trying to find

the features of an anal character, and not without some success. But the

interpretation he finally gives the subject of his homosexualizing tendencies

doesn’t affect him either way – nothing changes. There is the same dead end

that Freud encountered with the Wolf Man some years before, not all of the

clues to which are given in this case study, because at the time the object of

his research was something else.

 

这位主体调适得非常好。他跟他朋友的关系是好战的结盟的关系。他是很好的领导者,他对于在社交上他跟他们结合的事情非常感到興趣。他喜欢在那里无可否认的威望。我们的作者也特别注意到,他自学的功能,他的文件井井有条。你们能够看出,艾斯勒正在尝试找到一位口腔期的人物的特征,还颇有进展。但是他给予这位同性恋倾向的主体的解释,并没有在任何方面影响到他没有什么事情改变。就像几年前,弗洛依德在狼人」那里遭遇一样的僵局。

 

189

 

Let’s take a closer look at this study. The onset of the neurosis in its symp

tomatic aspect, which made the analyst’s intervention necessary, undoubtedly

presupposes a trauma which must have aroused something. In the subject’s

childhood we find traumas by the bucketful. When he was very small,

starting to crawl about the place, his mother had stood on his thumb. Eisler

doesn’t fail to point out that at this moment something decisive must have

occurred, since according to the family tradition he is supposed to have started

to suck his thumb after this incident. You see? – castration – regression. One

can find others. However, there is one small difficulty, which is that it is

noticed when the material is being produced that what was decisive in the

decompensation of the neurosis wasn’t the accident but the radiographic

examinations.

 

让我们更加仔细地观看这个研究。神经症的开始,在它的症状的层面,让精神分析家的介入成为需要。无可置疑地,它预先假设有一个创伤,一定曾经引起某件东西。在主体的童年,我们发现创伤是一大桶。当他小时候,他开始到处爬走,他的母亲踩到他的大姆指。艾斯勒必然会指出,在这个时刻,某件决定性的东西一定曾经发生,因为依照家庭的传统,在这个意外之后,他应该是已经开始吸吮他的大姆指。你们瞧?这就是阉割与倒退。我们还能够找到别的阉割与倒退。可是,有一个小小的困难。那就是,有人注意到,当材料正在被产生时,神经症的恶化的决定因素并不是这个意外,而是放射线的各种检视。

 

The analyst doesn’t see all the implications of what he gives us, and whatever

preconceived idea he has tends in the opposite direction. It is at the time

of the examinations which subject him to mysterious instruments that the

subject’s crises are triggered. And these crises, their sense, their regularity,

their style, very obviously appear linked to a fantasy of pregnancy.

 

精神分析家并没有看见所有的个案给予我们的暗示,他拥有的预先构想的观念,倾向于这个相反的方向。在反射线检视的这个时刻,主体的危机被触发,因为这些检视让他承受各种神密的仪器。这些危机,对危机的感知,危机的规律性,危机的风格,显而易见地似乎跟怀孕的幻想息息相关。

 

The manifestation of the subject’s symptoms is dominated by those relational

elements that in an imaginary way colour his relations with objects.

One can recognize in them an anal relation, or a homosexual relation, or this

or that, but these very elements are caught up in the question that arises –

Am I or am not someone capable of procreating? This question is obviously

located at the level of the Other, insofar as integration into sexuality is tied

to symbolic recognition.

 

主体病症的展示受到那些相关的因素所支配。以想象的方式,那些相关的因素扭曲了他跟各种客体的关系。我们能够在那些客体里,体认出一种口腔期的关系,或是同性恋的关系,或是这个或那个的关系。但是这些因素被困陷于产生的这个问题:「我是个能够或不能够生殖的人?」这个问题显而易见地位于大他者的层次,因为跟性的融合,跟象征界的体认息息相关。

 

If the recognition of the subject’s sexual position is not tied to the symbolic

apparatus, then nothing remains for analysis, Freudianism, but to disappear

– it means absolutely nothing. The subject finds his place in a preformed

symbolic apparatus that institutes the law in sexuality. And this law no longer

allows the subject to realize his sexuality except on the symbolic plane. This

is what the Oedipus complex means, and if analysis didn’t know this, it would

have discovered absolutely nothing.

 

假如主体的性的立场的这种体认没有跟象征的仪器息息相关,那么弗洛依德学派的精神分析就没有什么好作为,除了就是让它消失。那意味着,绝对是什么都没有。主体找到他的位置,在先前形成的象征界的仪器,这个仪器创制性别的法则。这个法则不再让主体能够体认出他的性别,除了就是在象征界的层面。这就是伊底普斯的意涵。假如精神分析不知道这点,它绝对是什么东西都没发现。

 

What is at issue for our subject is the question – What am I?, or Am /?, a

relation of being, a fundamental signifier. It is to the extent that this question

was aroused as symbolic, and not reactivated as imaginary, that the decompensation

of his neurosis was triggered and his symptoms became organized.

Whatever their qualities, their nature, the material from which they are borrowed,

his symptoms have the value of being a formulation, a reformulation,

or even an insistence, of this question.

 

对于我们的主体,具有争议的东西是这个问题:我是什么?或我存在吗?」这是一个生命实存的关系,一个基本的能指。甚至,这个问体被产生,作为是象征界,而不是重新被启动作为想象界。他的神经症的恶化被触发,他的病征变成器官征状。无论病征的特质,病征的特性,以及病征被借用的材料是什么,他的病症具有这个价值:对于这个问题的诠释,重新诠释,或甚至坚持。

 

This key is not sufficient on its own. It is confirmed by elements of his past

life which retain all their significance for the subject. One day he managed,

while hiding, to observe a woman from the neighborhood of his parents who

was uttering these endless groans. He came upon her writhing about, her

legs in the air. He knew what was going on, especially as she was unable to

give birth and the doctor had to intervene and carry the infant off in a bag,

in pieces, which was all that could be removed.

 

这个解答本身并不充分。这个解答由他过去的生活的各种因素获得证实。对于主体而言,这些因素保留所有它们的意义。有一天,当他隐藏时,他成功地观察到他的父母附近的一个女人。这个女人正在发愁那些不停的呻吟。在她蝡动呻吟时,他来到,她的脚悬空。他知道正在发生什么事情,特别是当她不能够生产,医生必须介入,用袋子将婴儿取出,碎片地。那是能够移除出来的东西。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

 

 

精神病 186

January 15, 2014

精神病 186

Here we’re in the innumerable shimmering of the great affective meaning.
The words to express it come to the subject in great abundance, they are at
his disposal, as accessible and as inexhaustible in their combinations as the
nature to which they are a response. This is the world of the child, in which
you feel at ease, all the more because you are familiar with his fantasies –
high is equivalent to low, the back is equivalent to the front, etc. Universal
equivalence is the law of this world, and it is even this that leaves us sufficiently
uncertain whether any structure in it can be pinned down.

在此,我们处于伟大的情感的意义的无数的微光当中。表达它的各种字词丰富地来到主体这里。它们听由他的使用。它们彼此的连接,跟它们作为回应的自然,都可以接近,而且无法穷尽。这就是小孩的世界,在那里,你们觉得自在。而且因为你们对于他的幻想耳熟能详,还更加自在。高与低相等,背后与前面相等。普遍性的相等,就是这个世界的法责。即使这个普遍性的相得,都让我们让的不确定:在这个普遍性的相等里的相等是否能够被掌握。

This discourse of affective meaning attains the sources of confabulation
straight away. On the other hand the discourse of passional demands, for
instance, is poor by comparison and is already drivel. This is because of the
impact of reason. The preverbal support of the imaginary relation therefore
quite naturally expresses itself in discourse here. We find ourselves here in a
familiar domain, one that has always been explored by empirical deduction
as much as by a priori categorial deduction. The source and storehouse of
this preconsdous of what we call imaginary is not unfamiliar, it has already
been successfully explored-in the philosophical tradition, and it may be said
that Kant’s schema-ideas are situated on the border of this domain – this at
least is where they might find their most brilliant credentials.

情感意义的辞说立刻探得错构症的各种来源。在另一方面,譬如,激情的要求的这个辞说,相较起来,是乏善可陈,而且总是无甚价值。这是因为理性的影响。想象的关系在文辞之前获得支撑,在此因此相当自然地用辞说表达它自己。我们在此发现我们自己处于一个熟悉的领域。这一个领域总是已经被经验的推理所探索,如同被先验的范畴的推论所探索。我们所谓的想象之物具有前意识到这个来源与贮藏所,我们并非不熟悉,在哲学的传统,它已经成功地被探索。我们可以说,康德的基模-理念就被定位在这个领域的边缘。这至少是这个地方,它们可以找到它们最杰出的推崇。

The classical theory of the image and the imagination is obviously surprisingly
inadequate. This is ultimately an unfathomable domain. While we’ve
made remarkable progress into its phenomenology, we are a long way from
having mastered it. While analysis has enabled the issue of the image’s formative
value – which tends to be confused with the problem of the origins or
even of the essence of life – to be brought to light, it’s unquestionably from
biologists and ethologists that we must expect any progress. While the analytic
inventory enables certain essential characteristics of the economy of the
imaginary function to be displayed, the question is not thereby exhausted.

意象与想象的古典的理论,显而易见地贫瘠得令人吃惊。追根究底,这是个深不可测的领域。虽然我们对于它的现象,已经有了杰出的进展,我们丝毫还没有掌握它。虽然精神分析已经让意象的形成的问题豁然开朗—这个问题经常跟生命起源,或甚至生命本质的问题混淆一块。无可置疑地,我们必须从生物学及种族学家那里,期望获得进展。虽然精神分析的目录,让想象的功能的生命活力的某些基本的特性能够被展示,这个问题因此还没有被穷尽。

Therefore, I have never said of this preconscious world, which is always
ready to emerge into the daylight of consciousness, and which is at the subject’s
disposal unless there are orders to the contrary, that in itself it has the
structure of language. I’m saying, because it is obvious, that it is recorded
there and that it is recast there. But it retains its own pathways, its characteristic
ways of communication. And this is not the level at which analysis has
made its essential discovery.

因此,我从来没有说,这个前意识的世界,总是准备出现进入意识的光天化日,而且让主体可以使用,除非有相反的命令。前意识世界的本身拥有语言的结构。我仅是说, 因为它显而易见被记录在那里,它在那里被重新铸造。但是它保留它自己的通道,它的特有的沟通的方式。这并不是精神分析自己的重大的发现的层次。

It is highly surprising to observe that an exclusive preponderance of the
world of imaginary relations is responsible for the emphasis in analysis on the
object relation, which has elided what is properly speaking the field of ana
lytic discoveries. One can follow the increasing predominance of this perspective
by reading what the analyst Kris has been producing in recent times.

我们非常惊奇地观察到,想象的关系的世界具有它专有的影响优势,竟然被认为是导致精神分析强调客体关系。对于精神分析的发现的领域的东西,恰当地说,客体关系并没有参与其间。我们能够遵循这个观点的逐渐具有优势,凭借阅读最近精神分析家克瑞士一直提倡的东西。

With respect to the economy of progress in an analysis, he emphasizes what
he calls – since he has read Freud – the preconscious mental processes and
the fruitful nature of ego regression, which amounts to placing the means of
access to the unconscious entirely on the level of the imaginary. If we follow
Freud it is on the contrary clear that no exploration of the preconscious,
however profound or exhaustive it is, will ever lead to an unconscious phenomenon
as such. The excessive prevalence of ego psychology in the new
American school introduces an illusion similar to that of the mathematician
– we can assume he is ideal * who having got a vague idea of the existence of
negative magnitudes sets about indefinitely dividing a positive number by
two in the hope of finally crossing over the zero line and entering the dreamt-of
domain.

关于精神分析的进展的活动,他强调他所谓前意识到精神过程与自我倒退具有成果的特性—因为他阅读过弗洛依德—这两者相等于是将将接近无意识的方法,完全放置在想象界的层次。假如我们遵循弗洛依德,相反地,显而易见的是,对于前意识的探索,无论多么深奥或穷尽,都不会导致无意识的现象的本身。在美国的新的学派的自我心理学过分盛行,介绍一种幻觉,类似数学家的幻觉。我们能够推想这种数学家的理想:他从事用二这个数字,将一个整数无穷尽地减除,希望最后跨越零的界线,进入被梦想的领域。

The error is all the more gross because there is nothing Freud places greater
insistence upon than the radical difference between the unconscious and the
preconscious. But one imagines that however much of a barrier there is, it’s
like putting up a partition in a grain store – the rats get through in the end.

这个错误更加明显,因为弗洛依德最为坚持的事,莫过于是强烈地区别无意识与前意识。但是,我们想象,无论中间的阻碍有多大,那就像在毂仓竖立起一个区隔。老鼠最终还是能够穿越过去。

The fundamental image that currently seems to regulate analytic practice is
that there must be something connecting neurosis and psychosis, the preconscious
and the unconscious. It is a matter of pushing, of nibbling away, and
one will succeed in perforating the partition wall.

目前似乎是规范精神分析实践的基本形象是,一定会有某件东西将神经症与精神病,前意识与无意识连接一块。问题是要逼迫,要逐渐咬啮,然后我们才会成功地穿透这个区隔的墙壁。

187
This idea leads authors who are even a little bit coherent to make altogether
surprising theoretical additions, like the notion of a sphere that is, as they
say, conflict-free – an extraordinary notion – that is not regressive but transgressive.
The likes of this had never been heard before, even in the most neospiritualist
psychology of faculties of the soul.

这个观念让那些甚至稍微能自圆其说的作者们,将令人惊奇的理论的增补汇集一块。譬如,像据说是免除冲突的球形的观念—这是一种特殊的观念—它并不是倒退,而是逾越。诸如其类以前从来没有被听说过,即使是探索灵魂的各种能力的新精神学派的心理学。

No one had ever thought of
making the will an agency located in a conflict-free empire. It’s clear what
leads them to it. For them the ego is the prevailing framework of phenomena,
everything goes through the ego, ego regression is the sole means of access to
the unconscious. Where, therefore, are we to locate the mediating element
that is indispensable for understanding the action of analytic treatment, if it
is not located in this type of ego that is really ideal, in the worst sense of the
word, which is the conflict-free sphere, which thus becomes the mythical
locus of the most incredible reaction entifications?

没有人曾经想到要将意志当作是位于免除冲突的帝国的代理者。引导他们探索意志的理由是显而易见。对于他们而言,自我是各种现象的佔优势的架构,每样东西都经过自我。自我的倒退是接近无意识的唯一方法。因此,假如这个中介的元素没有被定位在确实是至少是理想的这种自我,我们应该将中介的元素定位在哪里?因为这个中介的元素无法免除不用,为了要理解精神分析治疗的活动。这种理想的自我是免除冲突的领域,因此就成为最匪夷所思的反应的认同的神秘的轨迹。

In comparison with the preconscious we have just been describing, what is
the unconscious?

跟刚才我们一直在讨论的前意识比较起来,这个无意识是什么?

If I say that everything that belongs to analytic communication has the
structure of language, this precisely does not mean that the unconscious is
expressed in discourse. The Traumdeutung, The Psychopathology of Everyday
Life, and Jokes make this transparent – nothing in Freud’s detours is explicable
unless it is because the analytic phenomenon as such, whatever it may
be, isn’t a language in the sense in which this would mean that it’s a discourse
– I’ve never said it was a discourse – but is structured like a language. This
is the sense in which it may be called a phenomenal variety, and the most
revealing one, of man’s relations to the domain of language. Every analytic
phenomenon, every phenomenon that comes from the analytic field, from
the analytic discovery, from what we are dealing with in symptoms and neurosis,
is structured like a language.

即使我们说,属于精神分析沟通的每样东西,都拥有语言的结构,这确实并不意味着,无意识是用辞说表达。「梦的解析」,「日常生活的病理学」,以及「笑话」,明显地彰显这一点。弗洛依德迂回表达的东西,没有一样能够清楚解释。除非它是因为精神分析现象的本身,无论它是什么,它并非是我们通俗所说的辞说的语言。我从来没有说过无意识是一种辞说,我仅是说,无意识是像一种语言那样被建构。这种意义,可以被称为所现象的多样形态。人跟语言的领域的关系,最具有启发性的现象的多样形态。来自精神分析领域的每个现象,来自精神分析的发现,来自我们正在处理的病症,神经症的每个现象,它们像一种语言一样地被建构。

This means it’s a phenomenon that always presents the essential duality of
signifier and signified. This means that here the signifier has its own coherence
and nature which distinguish it from every other species of sign. We are
going to follow its trail in the imaginary preconscious domain.

这意味着,这个现象总是呈现能指与所指的基本的双重性。这意味着,在此,能指拥有它自己的一致性与特性。这种一致性与特性让能指与每个其他种类的符号讯息不同。我们将要在想像界的前意识到领域,追踪能指的痕迹。

Let’s begin with the biological sign. In the very structure, in the morphology,
of animals there is something that has this captivating value due to which
its receiver, who sees the red of the robin redbreast for instance, and who is made for receiving it, undertakes a series of actions or henceforth unitary
behavior that links the bearer of this sign to its perceiver. Here you have
what gives us a precise idea of what may be called natural meaning. Without
otherwise seeking how this might take place in man, it is clear that by means
of a series of transitions we can manage to purify, neutralize, the natural sign.

让我们从生物的符号开始。在动物的这个结构,这个形态学,有某件东西具有这个令人著迷的价值。由于这个价值,接收符号讯息者看见,譬如,看见知更鸟的红色胸膛的红色,接收者要具有接收这个符号讯息的能够,他才能从事一连串的活动,或从事一致性的行为,将这个符号讯息的负载者,跟符号讯息的接收者连接一块。在此,你们拥有我们确实能够理解的所谓自然的意义。假如没有用不同方式来寻求,在人的身上,这是如何发生的,显而易见,凭借一连串的转移,我们成功地将自然的符号讯息给予纯净化与中立化。

188

Then there is the trace, the footprint in the sand, the sign about which
Robinson Crusoe makes no mistake. Here sign and object separate. The trace,
in its negative aspect, draws the natural sign to a limit at which it becomes
evanescent. The distinction between sign and object is quite clear here, since
the trace is precisely what the object leaves behind once it has gone off somewhere
else. Objectively there is no need for any subject to recognize a sign
for it to be there – a trace exists even if there is nobody to look at it.

因此,就会有痕迹存在,沙滩上的足印,关于这个符号讯息,鲁宾森、克鲁索并没有看错误。在此,符号讯息与客体分开。这个痕迹,在它的负面而言,将自然的符号讯息发挥到极限,在这个极限,这个痕迹变成蒸发掉。符号讯息与客体的这个区别在此时相当清楚的,因为这个痕迹确实是这个客体留下来的东西,一旦它离开到某个其他地方。客观来说,为了让符号讯息存在那里,主体并没有必要去体认出一种符号讯息。即使在没有人观看它时,痕迹就已经存在那里。

When have we passed over into the order of the signifier? The signifier
may extend over many of the elements within the domain of the sign. But
the signifier is a sign that doesn’t refer to any object, not even to one in the
form of a trace, even though the trace nevertheless heralds the sigmfier’s
essential feature. It, too, is the sign of an absence. But insofar as it forms part
of language, the signifier is a sign which refers to another sign, which is as
such structured to signify the absence of another sign, in other words, to be
opposed to it in a couple.

我们什么时候已经过过进入能指的这个秩序?能指可能延伸到符号讯息的领域的内部的许多的元素。但是这个能指是没有提到任何客体的符号讯息。甚至没有提到痕迹形式的符号讯息。即使痕迹仍然宣告能指的基本特征。它也是一种缺席的符号讯息。但是因为它形成语言的部分,能指就成为是提到另外一个符号讯息的符号讯息。这另一个符号讯息的本身是如此地被建构,为了表意另外一个符号讯息的缺席。换言之,为了在配对当中跟它相对立。

I spoke about day and night. Day and night are in no way something that
can be defined by experience. All experience is able to indicate is a series of
modulations and transformations, even a pulsation, an alternation, of light
and dark, with all its transitions. Language begins at the opposition – day
and night. And once the day is there as a signifier, it lends itself to all the
vicissitudes of an arrangement whereby it will come to signify things of great
diversity.

我谈论到日与夜。日与夜根本就不是凭借经验能够定义的东西。经验所能够指示的东西,是一连串的光与暗的调适与转变,甚至是悸动,轮替,以及它所有的转换。语言就从日与夜的这个对立开始。一旦白天在那里作为一个能指,它引导它自己到安排的所有的起伏变化,在那里,它将逐渐表意各色各样的东西。

This characteristic of the signifier essentially marks everything of the order
of the unconscious. Freud’s opus, with its huge philological framework at
work deep in the heart of the phenomena, is absolutely unthinkable unless
we place the signifier’s dominance in analytic phenomena at centre stage.

能指的这个特性,基本上标示着每一样属于无意识的秩序的东西。弗洛依德的著作,具有它巨大的语言学的架构,运作于各种现象的核心深处。他的著作绝对是匪夷所思的,除非我们将能指在精神分析里的佔优势,放置在中心的阶段。

This reminder should take us a step further.
这个提醒将会引导我们更进一步探索。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

精神病 183

January 12, 2014

精神病 183

I’ve shown you in vivo in a case presentation that the subject is only able
in psychosis to reconstitute himself in what I’ve called the imaginary allusion.
This is precisely the point we have come to. The subject’s constitution in
imaginary allusion is the problem on which we need to make progress.

在个案演示时,我曾经用生物有机体跟你们显示,在精神病,主体仅是从我所谓的想象界的指称,他才能够重新建构他自己。这确实是我们获得的论点。主体在想象的指称的建构,是一个我们必须有所进展的难题。

Until now people have been satisfied with this. The imaginary allusion has
seemed to be very significant. People have rediscovered all the material, all
the elements, of the unconscious in it. They seem never to have wondered
what was significant from the economic point of view about the fact that by
itself this allusion has no power to resolve anything. They were aware of this
nevertheless, but as a mystery, and over time they strove to efface the radical
differences between this structure and the structure of the neuroses.

直到现在,人们一直满意这个论点。想象界的指称似乎一直是非常重要。人们曾经从新发现,无意识在想象界的所有的材料,所有的因素。他们似乎从来没有想要知道,重要的东西是什么,从生命活力的观点,关于这个事实:这个想象界指称的本身,并没有解决任何事情的权力。 可是,人们知道这个,但是作为一种神秘。随着时间过去,他们努力抹除这个强烈的差异,存在于这个结构与神经症的结构之间的差异。

I was asked the same questions in Strasbourg as in Vienna. People who
seemed fairly open to certain views I was putting forward ended up saying to
me – How do you work with psychotics? – as if stressing the ABC of technique
wasn’t enough, with an audience as unprepared as that one was. I replied –
The question is still somewhat in progress. We have to try to locate some reference
points before we can discuss technique, let alone any psychotherapeutic recipes.
They persisted – Nevertheless, one can* t just do nothing for them. – No, certainly
not. Before we discuss this, lets wait until certain things have been made clear.

在史特拉伯格,如同在维也纳,我被询问到相同的问题。人们似乎非常开放地接受我提出的观点,可是结束时,他们却对我说:「你如何处理精神病?」好像光是强调技术的基本常识并不足够,因为听众前一场的听众一样,并没有预期我会有这样的论点。我回答说,这个问题依旧还正在探索当中。我们必须尝试定位某些的指称点,我们才能够讨论技术。让我们等到某些的事情已经澄清之后。)

To lake a further step forward here, we must, as is often the case, take a
step back and return to the fascinating character offered by language phenomena
in psychosis – as it happens, this is liable to reinforce what just now
I called a misunderstanding.

为了从这里向前迈进,如同经常的情况,我们必须向后退一步,然后回到这个令人著迷的特性,由精神病的语言现象所提供的。经常发生的情况是,这种情况很容易增强我刚才所说的误解。

The hysteric’s question 163

I hear it said that I hold that everything the subject communicates he
expresses in words and thus that I deny the existence, to which people are
much attached, of the preverbal.

我听到有人说,我相信主体所沟通的每件事情,他都用话语表达,因此我否认文辞之前的东西的存在,虽然人们对于这种存在非常关切。

This extreme position doesn’t fail to produce, in those who dwell on this,
fairly lively recantations, which manifest themselves in two attitudes – the
hand on the heart, related to what we shall call the authentic attestation through
a displacement upwards, and the bowing of the head, supposed to be weighed
in the balance, which I reputedly unload too much at the wishes of my interpellator.

这个极端的立场一定会产生,对于那些详述这个非常生动撤销前言的人们。这种撤销前言用两种态度展示出来—「手放在心头上」,跟我们所谓的真诚的作证息息相关,通过一种朝上的替换。另一种是「头低垂下来」,被认为是失去平衡。对于我的询问者的愿望,我恶名昭彰地让他们很不自在。

2
People sometimes also say to me – Fortunately yotfre not alone in the SocUti
de psychanalyse. There is also a woman of genius, Frangoise Dolto, who shows us
the essential function of the image of the body and throws light on the way the
subject leans on it in his relations with the world. We are delighted to rediscover a
substantial relation here, which the language relation is undoubtedly tacked onto,
but it is infinitely more concrete.

人们有时也对我说:「幸运地,你在精神分析社团里并不孤单。还有一位天才的女人,法兰果斯、豆头 Frangoise Dolto 跟我们教导身体的意象的重要功能,并且启明主体跟他的世界的关系,依靠身体的方式。我们很乐意在此重新发现一个实质的关系。无可置疑地,语言的关系被依附到这个身体的关系。但是这个关系可是更加具体得多了。

I’m not at all criticizing what Frangoise Dolto teaches. She makes excellent
use of her technique and her extraordinary apprehension of the subject’s
imaginary sensibility. She speaks of all this and she also teaches those who
listen to her to speak of it. But making this remark doesn’t resolve the question.

我丝毫不是在批评法兰果斯、豆头所教导的东西。她优秀地使用她的技术及她特别地理解主体的想象的感知。她谈论所有这一切,她也教导那些倾听她谈论它的人们。但是发表这些谈论并没有解决这个问题。

I’m not surprised that something of a misunderstanding remains to be dispelled,
even in people who think they’re following me. Don’t think I’m
expressing any disappointment here. That would be to be in disagreement
with myself, since I teach you that misunderstanding is the very basis of
interhuman discourse.

我并不惊讶,某件属于误解的东西始终有待被澄清。即使那些认为他们一直在追随我的人们。清你们不要认为,我在此正在表达任何的失望。那跟我的为人并不相容。因为我教导你们,那种误解是人际之间的辞说的基础。
184

164 The psychoses
But that is not the only reason that I’m not surprised that my discourse
may have created a certain margin of misunderstanding. This is because in
addition, if one is to be consistent in practice with one’s own ideas, if all valid
discourse has to be judged precisely according to its own principles, I would
say that it is with a deliberate, if not entirely deliberated, intention that I
pursue this discourse in such a way as to offer you the opportunity to not
quite understand. This margin enables you yourselves to say that you think
you follow me, that is, that you remain in a problematic position, which
always leaves the door open to a progressive rectification.

但是那并不是唯一的理由,我并不惊讶,我的辞说曾经创造误解的某种边缘。这是因为除此而外,假如我们想要在实践时,跟我们自己的理念一致,假如所有自圆其说的辞说必须被判断,确实根据它自己的原则。我将会说,我用这样的方式追寻这个辞说,以致于让你们有机会并不完全理解,我是有点特意而为,虽然并不完全是特意。误解的这种边缘让你们自己能够说出,你们认为你们追随我。也就是说,你们始终处于问题重重的立场。这个立场总是摊开大门,接纳进步的改善。

In other words, if I were to try to make myself very easily understood, so
that you were completely certain that you followed, then according to my
premises concerning interhuman discourse the misunderstanding would be
irremediable. On the contrary, given the way I think that I have to approach
problems, you always have the possibility of what is said being open to revision,
in a way that is made all the easier by the fact that it will fall back upon
me entirely if you haven’t been following sooner – you can hold me responsible.
It is on this basis that today I shall take the liberty of going back over an
essential point.

换句话说,假如我们想要尝试让我们自己非常容易地被理解,这样你们才会完全确定,你们听懂,依照我的假设,关于人际之间的辞说,这种误解将是无可弥补的。相反地,假如考虑到我探索问题的思维的方式,你们总是拥有这个可能性:所说的内容开放接受修正的可能性,这种方式变得更加地容易,由于这个事实:假如你们没有早一点理解的话,问题将会完全回到我这里。你们能够要求我负起责任。就是根据这个基础,我将冒昧地回述一下一个基本的要点。

I’m not saying that what is communicated in the analytic relation passes
through the subject’s discourse. I am therefore absolutely not required to
distinguish, in the very phenomenon of analytic communication, between the
domains of verbal and preverbal communication. That this pre- or even
extraverbal communication is always present in analysis is not in doubt, but
it is a question of seeing what it is that constitutes the properly analytic field.

我并不是说,在精神分析的关系,所被沟通的东西,都经由主体的辞说。我因此绝对没有必要去区别,文辞与文辞之前的沟通的领域之间的差别,在精神分析沟通的这个现象里。这个文辞之前的沟通,或甚至额外文辞的沟通,总是存在于精神分析,这是无可置疑的,但是问题是要看出,是什么构成恰当的精神分析的领域。

185
What constitutes the analytic field is identical with what constitutes the
analytic phenomenon, namely the symptom – and also a very large number
of other phenomena that are called normal or subnormal, the sense of which
wasn’t elucidated before analysis, and that extend well beyond discourse and
speech, since they involve things that happen to the subject in his daily life,
like slips, memory disturbances, dreams, and the phenomenon of jokes, whose
value to the Freudian discovery is essential because it enables the perfect
coherence in Freud’s work between the analytic phenomenon and language
to be isolated.

构成精神分析领域的东西,跟构成精神分析现象是相一致的。换句话说,跟病症是相一致的。还有许多其他被称为正常或异常的现象。它们的意义在精神分析之前并没有被诠释。它们延伸超越辞说与言说,因为它们牵涉到主体在他的日常生活发生的事情。譬如,口误,记忆的扰乱,梦,以及笑话的现象。弗洛依德发现的这些价值是非常重要的,因为它让弗洛依德的研究,有可能获得完美的一致性,在精神分析的现象与有待孤立出来的语言之间,获的完美的一致性。

Let’s start by saying what the analytic phenomenon is not.

让我们开始这样说出精神分析的现象不是什么。

Analysis has thrown an immense amount of light on the preverbal. In analytic
doctrine this is linked essentially to the preconscious. It is the sum of
internal and external impressions, of information the subject receives from
the world he lives in, of the natural relations he has with it – assuming that
there are any relations in man that are entirely natural – some are, however
perverted they may be. Everything of the order of this preverbal thus partakes
the infantile doll that he once was, he is an excremental object, a sewer, a
leech. Analysis has called upon us to explore this imaginary world, which
partakes of a sort of barbaric poetry – though it is in no way the first to make
it felt, certain poetic works have been.

精神分析曾经让我们对于这个文辞之前的现象豁然开朗。在精神分析的信条,基本上,这是跟前意识息息相关。这就是内部与外部印象的总和,主体从他生活的世界可能接收的资讯的总和,他跟这个世界的关系的总和—假如在人身上有任何完全自然的关系的话。有些是自然的关系,尽管它们可能的变态的关系。属于文辞之前的秩序的一切东西,因此是主体先前作为婴孩状态的参与。他是一位排粪的客体,一个下水道,一个寄生虫。精神分析曾经召唤我们探索这个想象的世界,这个参与某种蛮荒诗篇的世界。虽然这根本并不是首先让它被感觉的世界,某种诗的著作才曾经是。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

精神病180

January 11, 2014

ON THE SIGNIFIER AND
THE SIGNIFIED
论能指与所指

XII
第十二章
The hysteric’s question
歇斯底里症的问题

ON THE PREVERBAL WORLD
论文辞前的世界
PRECONSCIOUS AND UNCONSCIOUS
前意识与无意识
SIGN, TRACE, SIGNIFIER
讯息,痕迹,能指
A TRAUMATIC HYSTERIA
创伤的歇斯底里

We’ve got to the point where the analysis of Schreber’s text has led us to
emphasize the importance of language phenomena in the economy of psychosis.
It is in this sense that one may speak of Freudian structures of the
psychoses.

我们将到达这个点,在这里,许瑞伯的精神分析的文本已经引导我们强调:语言现象在精神病的生命活力的重要性。从这个意义,我们可以谈论到弗洛依德学派对于精神病的结构。

1
What function do these language phenomena have in the psychoses?
It would be surprising if psychoanalysis didn’t offer us a new way of treating
the economy of language in the psychoses, a way that differs through and
through from the traditional approach, which refers to classical psychological
theories. Our own point of reference is different – it is our schema of analytic
communication.

这些语言现象在精神病扮演怎样的功能?假如精神分析没有提供新的方式,来治疗精神病的语言的生命活力,那就令人奇怪了。这种新的治疗方式跟传统的治疗方法彻底不同。后者提到古典的心理学理论。我们自己的指涉点则是不相同。我们的治疗方法是精神分析的沟通的基模。

Between S and O, the fundamental speech that analysis must uncover, we
have the interference of the imaginary circuit, which resists its passage. The
imaginary poles of the subject, o and o’, coincide with the said specular relation,
that of the mirror stage. The subject, in the corporeity and multiplicity
of his organism, in his natural fragmentation, which is in o’, refers to this
imaginary unity that is the ego, o, where he knows himself and misrecognizes
himself [se connait et se ntfconnait], and which is what he speaks about – he
doesn’t know to whom, since he doesn’t know who speaks in him either.

在主体与客体之间,精神分析必须揭露的基本的言说,我们拥有想象界的迴圈的干涉。想象界的迴圈抗拒主体与客体之间的这个基本言说的过高。主体的想象界的两极,o and o’, 跟上述的理想自我的魅影的关系巧合相应,那个镜像阶段的理想自我的魅影关系。在他的有机体的肉体性与多重性,在他的自然的片段化,那是在o’ 的这里。它提到自我0 的这个想象界的一致性。在那里,他认识他自己,并且误认他自己。那就是他言说的东西。他并不知道他对谁言说。因为他也不知道,谁跟他言说。

I used to say schematically, in the archaic period of these seminars, that
the subject begins by talking about himself, he doesn’t talk to you – then, he
talks to you but he doesn’t talk about himself – when he talks about himself,
who will have noticeably changed in the interval, to you, we will have got to
the end of the analysis.

我过去常用基模方式说明,在这些研讨班的以前的时期,主体先生从谈论他自己开始。主体并没有跟你谈论。因此,主体跟你谈论,但是他没有谈论有关他自己。当他对你谈论有关他自己时,我们将必须是到达精神分析的结束的时候。因为这个他自己在这个过程中间明显地已经改变。

If one wants to position the analyst within this schema of the subject’s
speech, one can say that he is somewhere in O. At least he should be. If he
enters into the coupling of the resistance, which is just what he is taught not
to do, then he speaks from o’ and he will see himself in the subject.

假如我们想要将精神分析定位在主体的言说的基模之内,我们能够说,主体就是在O这个大他者的某个地方。至少他应该在那里。假如他跟进入抗拒的这个配对当中,那么他从o’ 的这个理想自我的魅影言说,他将看出他是在主体这边。因为这种抗拒,正是我们教导他不要这样做。

This
occurs in the most natural of ways if he has not been analyzed – which does
happen occasionally, and I’d even say that in a certain way the analyst is
never fully an analyst, for the simple reason that he is a man, and that he,
too, partakes of the imaginary mechanisms that are obstacles to the passage
of speech. He must not identify with the subject, he must be dead enough
not to be caught up in the imaginary relation, within which he is always
solicited to intervene, and allow the progressive migration of the subject’s
image towards the S, the thing to be revealed, the thing that has no name,
that can only find its name to the extent that the circuit from S to O has been
completed directly. What the subject has to say through his false discourse
will find a passage all the more easily when the economy of the imaginary
relation has been progressively pared down.

这种进入会以最自然的方式发生,假如他还没有被精神分析的话—这种情况确实有时会发生。我甚至会说,以某种的方式,精神分析家从来就不是完全就是精神分析家。理由很简单,他是一个人。他也参与这个想象界的机制,作为言说的过程的阻碍的想象界的机制。除非他不要认同主体,除非他完全行尸走肉,他才不会被想象界的关系套网住。在这个想象界的关系里面,他总是被恳请要介入,并且让主体的形象逐渐地迁移,朝向这个主体,这位即将被显露的物象,没有名字的物象。仅有当迴圈从S主体到达O大他者直接完成的这个位置时,主体的这个物象才能够找到它的名字。通过他的虚假的辞说,主体所必需说的事情,将会更加容易地找到一个通道,当想象界的关系已经逐渐地被减少下来。

I’m moving quickly, since I’m not here today to go over the whole theory
of analytic dialogue for you. I simply want to indicate to you that the word –
to be understood with the emphasis that this comprises, the solution to an
enigma, a problematic function – is located in the Other, through the intermediary
of which all full speech is realized, this you are in which the subject
locates himself and recognizes himself.

我现在进行得很快,因为我今天在此,并不是要跟你们重述精神分析对话的整个的历史。我仅是想要跟你们指示:应该被理解的这个「字」的真理强调,这包含一个问题重重的功能,对于谜团的解答。这个「字」的真理,被定位在大他者那里。通过大他者的中介,「这就是你的本质」的所有的实词言说被实现。在这里,主体找到他自己的位置,而且体认出他自己。

Well then, through analyzing the structure of Schreber’s delusion at the
time it became stabilized into a system that links the subject’s ego to this
imaginary other, this strange god who understands nothing, who doesn’t reply,
who deceives the subject, we have been able to recognize that in psychosis
the Other, where being is realized through the avowal of speech, is excluded.

呵呵,通过精神分析许瑞伯的妄想的结构,当它变得稳定,进入连接主体的自我跟想象界的大者的这个系统,这位陌生的神,他什么都不了解,他不回应,他欺骗主体。我们才能够体认出:在精神病,这位大他者是被排除,因为在那里,生命实存是通过言说的承认,才被实现。

The phenomena in question in verbal hallucination exhibit in their very
structure the subject’s relationship of internal echo to his own discourse.
They ultimately become increasingly meaningless, as Schreber puts it, emptied
of sense, purely verbal, learned by rote, pointless refrains. What, then,
is this special relationship to speech? What does the subject lack for him to
be able to get to the point where it is necessary for him to construct this
entire imaginary world, for him to undergo within himself this automatism
of the function of discourse? Not only does discourse invade him, not only is
it a parasite in him, but he is dependent on its presence.

在文辞的幻觉里,受到质疑的这个现象,就在它们的结构里展示主体内部的回声,跟他自己的辞说的关系。它们最后变成越来越没有意义,如同许瑞伯所表达的,被掏空了意义,因为那些意义纯粹是文辞的意义,靠着强记,没有意义的重复记忆的学习得来。那么,什么才是跟言说的这个特别的关系呢?为了让主体能够到达他必须建构他整个的想象的世界,为了让主体经历他自身之内,辞说的功能的自动机制,主体还欠缺什么呢?这些辞说不但侵犯他,这些辞说不但在他的身上成为寄生物,而且他依靠这些辞说的存在。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

精神病 177

January 9, 2014

精神病 177

In the problematic field of the phenomena of Verneinung, phenomena occur
that must originate in a fall in level, in the passage from one register to another,
and that curiously manifest themselves with the characteristic of the negated
and the disavowed – it’s as if they are not existent. This is a very early property
of language, since the symbol is as such the connotation of presence and
absence.

在「否认」的各种现象的棘手的领域,现象发生,必然起源于层次的掉落,起源于从某个铭记到另外一个铭记的过程。耐人寻味地,这些现象展示它们自己,具有被否定,不被承认的特性。好像这些现象并不存在似的。这是语言的非常早期的属性。因为象征的本身作为是存在与缺席的外延意义。

156 The psychoses

This doesn’t exhaust the question of the function of negation within language.
There is an illusion of privation that stems from the ordinary usage of
negation. Moreover, all languages possess a whole range of negations, each
worthy of separate study – negation in French, negation in Chinese, etc.

这并没有穷尽语言之内的否定的功能的问题。有一种被剥夺的幻觉,起源于「否定」的这个普通的用法。而且,所有的语言都拥有一整套的「否定」,每个「否定」都值得分别研究。在法文的否定,在中文的否定,等等。

What’s important is this. What appears to be a simplification in discourse
harbors dynamics which escape us, are secret. There is an illusion in thinking
that a Verneinung is observable simply in the fact that apropos of a dream the
subject stresses, Ifs not my father. Everyone’s familiar with this, the subject
is noticeably affected by the interpretation and ends up saying that it’s his
father, and as we’re happy with this, we don’t go any further.

重要的是这个。 表面看起来是辞说的简化,内涵著我们无法理解的秘密的动力。在思想里,有一种幻觉:「否认」仅是这个事实,才能够被观察:关于梦,主体强调:「这并不是我的父亲。」每个人对于这个都耳熟能详。 主体显而易见地受到解释的影响,结束时说:这是他的父亲,因为我们对这个说法感到满意,我们就没有再深究。

The subject
says to you – / don’t want to tell you something that is unpleasant. Here it’s
quite different. He says it nicely, but through dynamics whose immediacy is
perceptible, he is in effect engaged in saying something unpleasant. It’s because
we experience this that we are alert to the mystery that this illusion of privation
can represent. Think of what Kant calls a negative value in its function,
not only of privation, but of subtraction, in its true positivity.

主体对你说:「我不想要告诉你某件令人不愉快的事情。在此,情况完全不同。他细致地说出它,但是通过当下可被感知的动力。他实际上正在从事说某件令人不愉快的事情。那是因为我们经验到这个,我们对于这个神秘有所警觉,被剥夺得这个幻觉所代表的神秘。假如你们想到康德所谓的否定具有它的功能的价值,不但是被剥夺的功能,而且是它的真实的正面,具有被扣除的价值。

The question of Verneinung remains entirely unresolved. What’s important
is to notice that Freud was only able to understand it by relating it to something
more primitive. He expressly acknowledges in his Letter 52 that the
primordial Verneinung comprises an initial putting into signs, Wahrnehmungszeichen.

「否认」的问题始终完全没有被解决。重要的是要注意到,弗洛依德仅是凭借着将「否认」,跟某件更加原始的东西连接一块,他才能够理解它。他生动地在他的第52封信里承认:原初的「否认」在于最初的用符号表现。

He admits the existence of this field I am calling that of the primordial
signifier. Everything he subsequently says in this letter about the dynamics
of the three great neuropsychoses that he applies himself to – hysteria, obsessional
neurosis, paranoia – presupposes the existence of this primordial stage,
which is the chosen locus of what for you I am calling Verwerfung.

他承认这个领域的存在。我称之为原初的能指点存在。他在这封信件里所说的每件事情,关于他致力研究的这三种神经症的精神病的动力学:歇斯底里症,妄想症的神经症,偏执狂。这个动力学预先假设这个原初的阶段的存在。那就是这个被选择的轨迹,我跟你们称之为「除权弃绝」的轨迹。

In order to understand this, consider something that Freud is constantly
pointing out, namely that one has to assume a prior, and at least partial,
organization of language in order for memory and historicization to work.
The memory phenomena that Freud is interested in are always language phenomena.

为了理解这个,请你们考虑某件弗洛依德不断地指出的东西。也就是说,我们必须假设一个先前的语言的组织,至少是部分的组织,为了让记忆与历史追踪能够运作。弗洛依德感到興趣的记忆的现象,总是语言的现象。

In other words, one already has to have the signifying material to
make anything signify at all. In The Wolf Man the primitive impression of
the famous primordial scene has remained over the years, serving no purpose,
though already signifying, before having its word to say in the subject’s
history. The signifier is thus primitively given, but it remains nothing as long
as the subject doesn’t cause it to enter into his history, which becomes important
between the ages of one and a half and four and a half. Sexual desire is
effectively what man uses to historicize himself, insofar as it’s at this level
that the law is introduced for the first time.

换句话说,我们必须要已经拥有能指化的材料,我们才能够让任何东西表达能指。在「狼人」,著名的原初的场景,具有原始的印象,过去那些年里始终存在,并没有什么目的。虽然它已经表达能指,在它拥有它的词语来表达主体历史的东西。这个能指因此是原初就被给予,但是它始终没有运作,只要主体没有引起它进入它的历史。这在一岁半到四岁半之间,非常重要。性的欲望有效地就是人用来让他成为历史的东西。因为在这个层次,法则首次被介绍。

You now see the general economy of what Freud gives us with his simple
schema in this little letter. This is confirmed by a hundred other texts. One
of you, whom I have praised for having contradicted what is being developed
here, pointed out to me that the end of the text on “Fetishism” refers quite
directly to what I’m now explaining to you. There Freud makes an essential
revision to the distinction he had drawn between neurosis and psychosis,
saying that in the psychoses reality is reworked, that a part of reality is suppressed,
and that reality is never truly scotomized.14 Ultimately, and you will
see this from the context, it’s to a deficiency, to a hole in the symbolic, that
he is referring, even if in the German text it’s the term reality that is used.
Haven’t you seen what the primordial phenomenon is when I present concrete
cases to you of people who have recently plunged into psychosis?

你们现在看出,弗洛依德在这封短信,用他简单的基模,给予我们的东西,具有一般性的经济活力。我们从上百个其他文本来证实。你们其中一位,我曾经赞美,因为反驳在此被发展的东西。他曾经跟我指出,「论物神化」的文本的结尾,相当直接地提到我现在跟你们解释的东西。在那里,弗洛依德做一个重要的修订,对于他在神经症与精神病,所获得的区别。他说: 在精神病,现实重新被建构,一部分的现实被压抑,那部分的现实从来没有真实地被孤立起来。最后,你们将会看出这个,从上下文。他提到的是一种欠缺,他提到象征界的一个空洞。即使在德文里,他用的是「现实界reality」这个术语。你们难道不是已经看出:原初的现象就是当我呈现具体的个案给予你们,关于最近已经陷入精神病的那些人们?

I showed you a person who thought he had been receiving advances from a
character who had become his friend and the essential point of attachment in
his existence. This character withdrew, and then there he was in a state of
perplexity linked to a correlate of certainty, which is how the approach to the
prohibited field announces itself, access to which on its own constitutes the
onset of psychosis.

我跟你们指出一个人。他认为他一直在接受一个人物的挑衅,这个人已经成为他的朋友,而且在他的存在里,已经有重要的情感关联。这个人物撤退,然后处于有些确定,又有些困惑的状态。这就是被禁止的领域宣告它自己的接近的方式。接近这个被禁止的领域本身就构成精神病的开始。

How does one enter psychosis? How is the subject led, not into alienating
himself in the little other, but into becoming this something which, from
within the field in which nothing can be said, appeals to all die rest, to the
field of everything that can be said? Isn’t this something that evokes what
you see displayed in the case of President Schreber – namely, these fringe
phenomena at the level of reality which have become significant for the subject?
Psychotics love their delusion like they love themselves.15 Having said this,
Freud, who hadn’t yet written his article on narcissism, added that the entire
mystery lies here. This is true. What is the relationship between the subject
and the signifier that is distinctive of the very phenomena of psychosis? How
come the subject falls entirely into this problematic?

15 February 1956

一个人如何进入精神病呢?这个主体如何被引导,不是进入这个小它者跟自己异化,而是进入成为这个某件东西,从没有一样东西能够被说的这个领域之内,这个东西诉诸于所有的其他东西,诉诸于每样能够被说出的东西的领域。这个某件东西难道不是召唤你们看见,被展示在许瑞伯庭长的个案的东西?换句话说,这些在现实界的层次的边缘的现象,对于主体,它们不是已经变成很重要吗?精神病者爱他们的幻觉,就像他们爱他们自己。当弗洛依德说完这个之后,他还没有写出他探讨自恋的论文。他补充说,整个的神秘就在这里。作为精神病的这些现象,显示出来的主体与能指之间的这个关系是什么?

These are the issues that we are raising this year and I hope we are able to
make some headway with them before the long vacation.

今年,我们正在提出的这些议题。我希望在长假之前,。我们能够对它们有些进展。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

精神病 175

January 8, 2014

精神病 175
The psychoses 175

The requirements of his own conception of things are manifest in the fact
that between the essentially ephemeral Wahrnehmungen [perceptions], which
disappear as soon as they appear, and the constitution of the system of consciousness
and, even at this stage, of the ego – he calls it the official ego, and
official in German means the same as officiel in French, in the dictionary it’s
not even translated – there are the Niederschriften [registrations], of which
there are three. Here we witness Freud’s development of an initial apprehension
of what memory might be in its analytic functioning.

他自己对于各种物象的要求,展示在这个事实:在本质上是瞬间的感知与意识的系统的构成之间。前者一出现,就消失。即使在这个阶段,自我的这个阶段,他称之为「official ego 」。在德文里,「Official」这个字的意思跟法文的 「officiel」,在字典,它甚至没有被翻译。那就是「铭记」的意涵,有三种铭记。在此,我们见证到弗洛依的的发展,对于最初的理解记忆可能是什么,在它的分析的功能里。

Freud gives a number of chronological divisions – that there are systems
formed for example between birth and one and a half, then between one and
a half and four years of age, then between four and eight, etc. But despite his
saying this, we aren’t required to believe, any more than we did before, that
these registers are constituted successively.

弗洛依德发表许多按照时间顺序的区隔。譬如,有些系统被形成,从出生到一岁半,然后,在一岁半到四岁之间,然后四岁到八岁之间,等等。但是,尽管他这样说,正如以前一样,我们并没有被要求相信:这些铭记是连续地被形成。

Why distinguish them from one another and how do they become apparent?
They become apparent in the defense system, which consists in the fact
that things that don’t give us pleasure don’t reappear in any of the registers.
Thus here we are in the official economy, and this is where we don’t recall
what doesn’t give us pleasure. This is absolutely normal. Call it defense, but
it isn’t pathological for all that. It’s even what one has to do – if we forget
things that are disagreeable to us we can only come out ahead. A notion of
defense that doesn’t start from this falsifies the entire question. What gives
defense its pathological character is the fact that, around the famous affective
regression, topographical regression takes place. A pathological defense, when
produced in an uncontrolled fashion, provokes unjustifiable reverberations,
because what goes for one system doesn’t go for another. The disturbance
stems from this confusion between mechanisms, and it’s from this point on
that we speak of a system of pathological defense.

是什么让这些铭记互相区别?它们如何变得明显?它们在防卫的系统里变得明显。这个防卫系统在于这个事实:没有给予我们快乐的物象,并没有重新出现在任何的这些铭记里。因此,在此,我们处于正式的生命活力,这就是我们没有回想那些没有给予我们快乐的东西的地方。这是绝对正常的。你们可以称之为防卫,但是尽管这样,它并不是病理的防卫。那甚至是我们必须做到事情。假如我们忘记那些令我们不愉快的事情,我们仅能预先宣布。不是从这个观点出现的观念,让问题变得虚假。这个防卫之所以具有它的病理的特性,是由于这个事实: 形态上的倒退发生在这个著名的情感的倒退的四周。当病理的防卫不由自主地去被产生,它触动一种无法自圆其说的迴响。因为适用于某个系统的东西,并没有适用于另外一种。这种困扰起源于各种机制之间的混淆。从这一点开始,我们谈论的是病理防卫的系统。

155
To understand it properly we shall begin with the best known phenome
non, from which Freud always started, the one that explains the existence of
the system Unbezousstsein.

为了适当地理解,我们将从最著名的现象开始。弗洛依德总是从这个现象开始。这个现象解释
「无意识」系统的存在。

The mechanism of topographical regression here is perfectly clear at the
level of finished discourse, which is that of the official ego. Here one finds
agreements and coherences between discourse, signifier, and signified superimposed
upon one another, forming the intentions, the plaints, the obscurity,
the confusion, in which we live and due to which, whenever we spell something
out, we always have this feeling of discordance, of never being com-
pletely up to what we want to say. This is the reality of discourse. We are
nevertheless well aware that the signified is sufficiently captured by our discourse
for everyday purposes. It’s when we want to do a bit better, to get to
the truth, that we are in total disarray, and rightly so. It is, moreover, why
most of the time we give up the game.

形态的倒退的机制非常清楚,在完成的辞说的层次。这个完成的辞说就是正式自我的辞说。在此,我们发现辞说,能指,与所指之间的一致性与一贯性,彼此重叠赋加,而形成这些意图,哀伤的喊叫,模糊,混淆。我们就生活在那里,并且由于这样,每当我们解释某件事情时,我们总是具有不协调,以及从来没有畅欲所言的这种感觉。这就是辞说的现实界。可是,我们清楚地知道,这个所指充分地被我们的辞说补捉,作为日常的用途。就在当我们想要稍微做得更好时,想要获得这个真理时,我们就完全崩塌,而且很有理由是这样。而且,那就是为什么大部分的时间,我们放弃这个遊戏。

176
There is indeed a relationship between meaning and the signifier, it is what
the structure of discourse supplies. Discourse, which is what you hear when
you listen to me, and it does exist – the proof is that sometimes you don’t
understand it – , is a signifying temporal chain. But at the level of neurosis,
which brought about the discovery of the realm of the Freudian unconscious
qua register of memory, our good fellow, instead of using words, uses everything
at his disposal – he empties his pockets, he turns his trousers inside
out, he puts his functions, his inhibitions inside, he gets completely inside
himself, with the signifier, it’s he who becomes the signifier. His real, or his
imaginary, enters into the discourse.

确实有一种关系存在于意义与能指之间。那就是辞说的结构应用的东西。辞说就是你们听见的东西,当你们倾听我在言说。辞说确实是存在。证据是,有时,你们并不理解它。辞说是能指意义的时间锁链。但是在神经症的这个层次,神经症导致弗洛依德的无意识的领域的发现,作为是记忆的铭杰,我们的好朋友,他并不是使用文字,而是使用一切用得到的东西,他掏出口袋,将裤子翻转,他将他的各种功能,他的压抑放进里面。他完全进入他自己里面,用这个能指,他就变成这个能指。他的实在界,或他的想象界,进入这个辞说。

If this isn’t what a neurosis is, if this isn’t what Freud taught, then I give up.

假如这不是神经症的情况,假如这并不是弗洛依德所教导的,那么我放弃。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

精神病 173

January 5, 2014

精神病 173

 

3

In his Letter 52 to Fliess, Freud returns to the circuit of the psychical apparatus.

 

在他给弗利斯的52封信,弗洛依的回答精神机制的迴圈。

 

You are, I hope, familiar with the Fliess correspondence, which has been

delivered to us by certain testamentary or testimonial hands with a series of

cuts and expurgations that, whatever their justification, the reader cannot fail

to feel is scandalous. Nothing can justify the cutting of a text at the point at

which the remainder, even if it were regarded as outdated and weaker, might

enlighten us on Freud’s thought.

 

我希望,你们对弗利斯的通信耳熟能详。这些通信由某个见证,或验证者的手中交给我们,有一系列的删除与清理。不管他们的理由是什么,读者一定会感觉有些是丑闻。对于可能带给我们对弗洛依德思想的启悟的遗物,处于这个关键的文本,尽管被认为是过时与微弱,任何对于文本的删减,无难以自圆其说。

 

152 The psychoses

 

The psychical apparatus that preoccupies Freud isn’t the psychical apparatus

as conceived by a professor behind a table and in front of a blackboard,

who modestly gives you a model which, all things considered, looks like it

 

 

might work – whether it works well or poorly, it doesn’t much matter, what

is important is to have said something that seems in some simple way to

resemble what is known as reality.

 

让弗洛依德全神贯注的心理的机制,并不是讲桌之后,黑板之前的教授所构想的心理的机制。那种教授谦虚地给予你一个模式,这种模式通盘考量之下,看起来似乎行得通,无论它运作得顺畅与否,这并不重要。重要的是是,要曾经说出某件似乎简明扼要地类似是现实界已知的东西。

 

For Freud, it’s a matter of the psychical

apparatus of his patients, not of the ideal individual, and it’s this that introduces

him to this really astounding productiveness that we see here, even

more than anywhere else, in this famous Letter 52. What he is seeking to

explain is not just any old psychical state, but that from which he set out,

because it alone is accessible and proves to be fruitful in the experience of the

treatment – the phenomena of memory. The schema of the psychical apparatus

in Freud is invented to explain phenomena of memory, that is, what

isn’t going well.

 

对于弗洛依德,问题是他的病人的这个心理机制,而不是理想个人的心理机制。就是这个心理机制介绍他到这个确实令人惊奇的创造,我们在这封著名的52封信看到的创造,远胜于任何其他地方。他尝试要解释的,不仅是任何的心理的状态,而是,他从那个心理状态出发。因为仅有那个心理状态是可以接近,并且证明在治疗的经验里是有成果的记忆的各种现象。在弗洛依德,心理机制的这个机模被杜撰来解释记忆的各种现象。换句话说,进行得并不顺畅的东西。

 

173

You must not think that the general theories of memory that have been

proposed are particularly satisfactory. Because you’re psychoanalysts you’re

not excused from reading the works of psychologists, some have done some

sensible things, have discovered some remarkable discrepancies in valuable

experiments – you will see their difficulty, the twists and turns they perform,

in trying to explain the phenomenon of reminiscence.10 However, Freudian

experience shows that the memory which interests psychoanalysis is quite

distinct from what psychologists speak of when they display its mechanism

to us in an animate being in an experiment.

 

你们一定不要认为,曾经被建议的各种一般性的记忆理论,有特别令人满意之处。因为你们是精神分析家,你们必然被要求阅读心理学家的各种著作,有些著作说得有条有理,曾经发现某些杰出的差异,在各种宝贵的试验里。你们看出他们的困难,他们从事的变化与转变,当他们尝试解释回忆的现象。可是,弗洛依德的精神分析经验显示:让精神分析感到興趣的记忆完全不同于那些心理学家谈论的东西。当他们跟我们展示它的机制,用试验中的有机生命。

 

I shall illustrate what I mean.

 

我将举例解释我的意思。

 

The octopus. It’s the most beautiful animal there is. It has played a fundamental

role in Mediterranean civilizations. Nowadays it’s very easy to catch.

You put it into a little jar, insert electrodes, and watch. The octopus extends

its limbs and, suddenly, it retracts them. And one observes that it’s very soon

wary of our electrodes. So we dissect it and we discover, in what serves as its

head, a large nerve, large not only in size but also in the diameter of the

neurons, visible under the microscope. This is what serves as its memory,

that is, if you sever it in the live octopus, the apprehension of experience

works much less well, a deterioration is produced in the registrations of memory,

which is why it’s thought this is the seat of its memory. And nowadays

people tell themselves that perhaps the octopus’s memory functions like a

little machine, in that it’s something that goes round in circles.

 

章鱼。那是世上最美丽的动物。它扮演一个基本的角色,在地中海的文明。今天,我们很容易捉住章鱼。你们将它放进一个小罐子里,插进电极,然后观察。章鱼延伸它的肢爪,突然地,它缩回它的肢爪。我们观察到,它很快地惊觉到我们的电极。所以我们解剖它,我们发现,在充当它的头的东西,一种大的神经,不仅体积大,而是神经的直径也大,在显微镜下历历可见。这就是用来充当它的记忆的东西。假如你们将活生生的章鱼的那个部分切开,它对经验的理解就运作得比较不好,在记忆的铭记,会产生恶化。这就是为什么大家认为那就是章鱼的记忆的位置。今天,人们告诉自己,或许章鱼的记忆运作就像一部机器,因为它是某件绕着圆圈打转。

 

I’m not in the process here of distinguishing man from the animal, since

what I teach you is that in man, too, memory is something that goes round

in circles. However, it’s made up of messages, it’s a succession of little signs

of plus or minus, which file in one after the other and go round and round

like the little electric lights on the Place de l’Opfra that go on and off.

 

我在此并不是正在区别人类与动物的不同,因为我教导你们的是,在人类身上,也是一样,记忆是某件环绕圆圈打转的东西。可是,人的记忆是由各种的讯息组成,各种加与减的微小讯息的连续体。它们一个接续一个地排列,不断地环绕打转,就像奥普拉广场的那些小电灯闪烁明灭。

 

 

This is what human memory is. However, the primary process, the pleasure principle,

means that the psychoanalytic memory Freud talks about is,

contrary to that of the octopus, something completely inaccessible to experience.

What else would it mean to say that desires in the unconscious are never

extinguished, because those that do become extinguished are by definition

never spoken of again? There are some that are never extinguished and continue

to circulate in memory. In the name of the pleasure principle, they

cause the human being to recommence the same painful experiences, in cases

in which things are connected to one another in memory in such a way as to

persist in the unconscious. What Fm saying here is only the simple expression

of what you already know in principle, but which of course is what you

know as if you didn’t know it. Fm not only trying to make you know it, but

also to get you to recognize that you know it.

 

这就是人类的记忆的样子。可是,原初的过程,也就是快乐原则,意味著,弗洛依德谈论到底精神分析的记忆,跟章鱼的记忆恰恰相反,某件精神分析经验完全无法接近的东西。它打算要说的难道不就是:在无意识里,欲望从来没有被消灭,因为那些确实被消灭的欲望,在定义上,从来没有再被谈论到?有些欲望是从来没有被消灭的,并且继续地在记忆里流通。在某些情况,以快乐原则的名义,它们引起人类重新开始相同的痛苦的经验。在那些情况里,各种事情在记忆里如此地互相连接,以致于它们持续存在于无意识里。我在此正在说的是,仅是简单地表达你们在原则上已经知道的东西。但是当然,它并不是你们所知道的,好像你们不知道它。我不仅尝试要让你们知道它,而且也要让你们承认,你们知道它。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

庄周梦蝶 3

January 1, 2014

庄周梦蝶 3

Graphically this could be represented as (∃&a); i.e. the subject assuming

responsibility for the (object as) cause.1 It must be kept in mind, however,

that such an assumption is never a permanent effect. Desire is in perpetual

movement and the subject in question is the barred subject of the unconscious,

not some monadic subject of pure being.

 

从图形来看,这个幻见能够用这个公式 $‹›a来代表;主体担负起将这个客体作为原因的责任。可是,我们必须记住,这样一种担负从来就不是一种长久的结果。欲望处理永久的流动,受到质疑的主体就是无意识的被划杠的主体,而不是纯粹生命的某个单价主体。

 

Thus, the pulsative nature

of the unconscious must be accounted for. The subject emerges as pulsation

in and through the symbolic realm and it is only thus that the operation

of traversing the fantasy can be enacted, as speech:

 

因此,无意识悸动的这个特性必须被解释。主体出现,作为是在象征的领域里,以及穿透象征领域的悸动。仅有是这样,亲历幻见的运作才能够被扮演,作为言说:

 

what’s important is to teach the subject to name, to articulate, to bring

this desire into existence, this desire which, quite literally, is on the

side of existence, which is why it insists. If desire doesn’t dare to

speak its name, it’s because the subject hasn’t yet caused this name to

come forth.

 

重要的是要教导主体命名,表达,让这个欲望存在。实质来说,这个欲望是在生命实存的这一边。这就是为什么它坚持。假如欲望不敢讲出它的名字,那是因为主体还没有引起这个名字前来。

 

That the subject should come to recognise and to name his desire,

that is the efficacious action of analysis. But it isn’t a question of

recognising something which would be entirely given, ready to be

coapted. In naming it, the subject creates, brings forth, a new presence

in the world. (Lacan, The Ego in Freud’s Theory 228-29)

 

主体应该逐渐体认及命名他的欲望。那就是精神分析的有效的活动。但是问题并不是要体认某件将会完全被给予的东西,准备跟它缝合。当主体命名他的欲望时,主体创造并带出世界里的一种新的存在。

                 (拉康:弗洛依德理论里的自我 22-229页)

 

Insofar as the objet petit a is, as such, not, that which attains to the position

of objet petit a is always necessarily a functionary of the subject. This

is not, however, to suggest that there is something “out there” chosen by the

subject which would provide the lost jouissance implied by objet petit a, but

rather that the subject has, in the mode of fantasy, chosen something to function

as the necessary surrogate of the object cause of desire. In so naming

this desire, and thus constituting it, the subject puts itself in a position to

claim responsibility for it.

 

因为小客体的本身,并不是它获得的东西,小客体的立场总是必然是主体的一种工作者。可是,这并不是建议,「在外面那里」,有某件东西受到主体的选择,而主体将提供小客体暗示的失落的欢爽。相反地,这是建议,用幻见的模式,主体已经选择某件东西充当欲望的客体原因的必要代理者。当主体这样命名这个欲望,并且因此构成这个欲望,主体将它自己放置在这个立场,宣称对它担负责任的立场。

 

As desire is that which motivates and constitutes

the subject, this naming and bringing forth allows the subject to assume responsibility

for itself and thus assume a subjective position which is not in

thrall to, though it is, clearly, still dependent upon, the Other.

 

当欲望是启发主体,构成主体的东西,这个命名及带出让主体能够担负起对它自己的责任,因此担负起一个主体的立场。这个立场虽然显见地依旧依赖大他者,但是并不受大他者的操控。

 

Traversing the fantasy thus returns us to one interpretation of the Lacanian

imperative Wo Es war, Soll ich werden, “there where it was, I must

come to be.” It also sheds some light on Lacan’s emphasis on desire in his

seminar on Ethics when he asks, “Have you acted in conformity with the desire

that is in you?” (Ethics of Psychoanalysis 314) or declares that “the only

thing of which one can be guilty is of having given ground relative to

one’s desire” (319).

 

亲历幻见因此让我们回来诠释拉康的这个命令:「本我以前所在的地方,自我必须逐渐存在那里」。它也让我们明白拉康对于欲望的强调,在他的精神分析伦理学的研讨班,他询问:「你曾经遵照你内在的这个欲望来行动吗?」(313页),或宣称:「我们唯一会有罪恶感的事情,就是相对于我们的欲望,我们过于让步。」

 

Wo Es war, soll Ich werden in this context would thus indicate the

movement, the traversing, from the subjugated subject of fantasy, wherein

the subject is (perceived as) constituted by, caused as subject of desire by,

the elusive objet petit a, to a position of subjectivity wherein it, the subject,

is its own cause.

 

在这个文本内容里,「本我以前所在的地方,自我必须逐渐存在那里」,因此将指示著这个运动,这个亲历穿越,从幻见的这个受到屈服的主体。在那里,主体被感觉,作为是成为这个闪躲的小客体构成,引起的欲望的主体,运动,及亲历到这个主体性的立场:主体是它自己的原因的主体性立场。

 

We could thus reformulate the dictum “Where It was, there

must I come into being” as “Where the object was (perceived to be the cause

my desire), there shall I come to be (the cause of my own desire).” Such a

shift is a radical realtering of the subjective position from which one speaks.

It is clear also, however, that such a realtering is and can only be momentary

as, in enunciating and thus creating its desire, the subject necessarily

does so in the mode of the Other; i.e. language.

 

我们因此重新诠释这个命令:「本我以前所在的地方,自我必须逐渐存在那里」,作为是「以前客体被感觉是我的欲望的原因的地方,我将逐渐成为我自己的欲望的原因。」这样一种转变,强烈地重新改变作为言说的主体的立场。可是,这也显而易见地,这样一种重新改变,仅是暂时,而且仅能够是暂时的。当主体表达,因此创造它的欲望时,主体这样做,必然是用大他者的模式,也就是用语言的模式。

 

The function of fantasy persists,

the gaze cannot be escaped. The desire the subject brings into existence

through its enunciation is necessarily passed over into the realm of the

Other (desire is still the desire of the Other), but through the process of enunciating

its desire the subject can succeed in repositioning itself and thus

attaining something of its own.

 

幻见的功能持续著,这个凝视无法被逃避。主体通过它的表达,让它存在的这个欲望,必然会传递进入大他者的领域(欲望依据是大他者的欲望)。但是通过表达它的欲望的这个过程,主体能够成功地重新定位自己的立场,因此获得某件属于它自己的东西。

 

Here we can see that traversing the fantasy does not entail a “getting

over” or moving beyond fantasy in any absolute sense. It is not that the subject

who has traversed the fantasy will no longer have any need of such a

function. Fantasy is a necessity in subjective life in order to avoid the traumatic

effects of the Real and to accept castration.

 

在此,我们能够看出,亲历幻见并米有涵盖一种「穿越」,或绝对地移动超越幻见。这倒不是因为亲历幻见的主体,不再拥有这个功能的需要。幻见是主体一生的必要性,为了避免实在界的创伤的影响,以及接受阉割。

 

Rather, traversing the fantasy

involves the formation or configuration of a new fantasy which allows

or reflects the assumption of a “new” subjective position in relation to the

Other and the Other’s desire. Such a (re)formation of the subjective position

is the moment of Wo Es war, soll Ich werden, wherein the subject (∃) assumes

a position in that place previously occupied by the Other or the discourse

of the Other.

 

相反地,亲历幻见牵涉到新的幻见的形成或融合。这个新的幻见容许或反映出,担负起「新」的立场的责任,跟大他者及大他者的欲望息息相关。主体立场的这个重新形成,就是这个时刻:「本我以前所在的地方,自我必须逐渐存在那里」,在那里,主体担负起在那个位置的一个立场,先前由大他者或大他者辞说佔据的立场。

 

Such a moment, the traversing of fantasy, can then be

understood to be a moment of (taking) responsibility, a retroactive assumption

of responsibility for the position one will have come to occupy. Such

occupation and its concomitant responsibility is indicative of a temporalization

which resists temporalization. It is not the “despite what has been, I will

be” of ego-psychology but rather a reconfiguration of and assumption of responsibility

for the very relation of cause and effect which might be taken

as having or having been seen to have occurred.

 

这样一个时刻,幻见的亲历,因此能够被理解为担负起责任的时刻,对我们将来逐渐会佔据的立场,回溯地担负起责任。这样的工作及其伴随着的责任,指示著抗拒时间化的时间。并不是自我心理学所谓的「尽管曾经发生的事情,我将获得生命实存」。相反地,这是重新融合,并担负起因果的这个关系的责任。因果的这个关系,可以被认为是曾经发生,或被看见曾经发生。

 

This retroactive positing of the subject’s responsibility is one which occurs

within what Lacan terms logical, rather than chronological, time. This

points towards an understanding of the relationship between cause and effect

which unsettles traditional or received notions of what such a relationship

would “naturally” be in any given situation and emphasizes the assumptive

and forced qualities of this relationship.

 

回溯地提出主体的责任,发生在拉康术语所说的逻辑时间,而不是年表时间。这指向理解到因与果之间的关系。这个因与果的关系的理解,动摇了传统或俗见的观念:因果「自然地」存在于某个特定情况。这个因与果的关系的理解强调承受与强制的各种性质。

 

Simply put, the uninvested,

received notion that A is (and always is) the cause of B in any (comparable)

circumstance is put under question: “cause is a concept that, in the last

resort, is unanalysable – impossible to understand by reason – if indeed the

rule of reason, the Vernunftregel, is always some Vergleichung, or equivalent

– and that there remains essentially in the function of cause a certain

gap” (Four Fundamental Concepts 21).

 

简言之,这个没有生命力投注的俗见观念:在任何(可比较)的情况,甲是(或总是)乙的原因。这个观念受到质疑。「假如理性的原则总是某种某种的等价,原因是一种追根究底无法分析的观念,原因不可能让理性来理解。在原因的涵数,基本上始终存在着某种的差距。」(精神分析四个基本原则 21页)。

 

This logic can also be detected in Lacan’s statement concerning not

ceding or giving ground relative to one’s desire. By allowing the relation

with the object to pertain in such a way that the object is Other, that is, that

the subject finds its cause in something radically external to itself, the subject

cannot yet bring itself to be in a properly subjective position. The

assignation of cause is always a retroactive and subjective effect. By as-

signing the role of cause to something else, the subject denies itself and

places itself under the sway of the Other, albeit in a deluded form. It is only

through the subjective assumption of the cause that the subject allows

its own possibility.

Napier University

United Kingdom

 

在拉康的陈述,逻辑也能够被觉察出来,关于屈服或让步于自己的欲望。凭借着让跟客体的关系隶属于客体就是大他者的方式,换句话说,主体在纯然它自身之外的某件东西,找到它自己的原因,主体还是不能够让它自己处于恰如其分的主体的立场。原因的分配总是回溯的,而且是主观的影响。凭借将原因的角色分配给某件其他的东西,主体否认它自己,并且将自己放置在大他者的影响之下,虽然是以虚假的方式。只有通过主体担负起原因的责任,主体才有可能成为它自己。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

 

Works Cited

Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy. Trans. Donald A. Cress. Indianapolis:

Hackett, 1993.

Lacan, Jacques. “The Direction of the Treatment and the Principles of its Power.” Ecrits.

Trans. Bruce Fink. New York: Norton, 2006. 489-542.

—. The Ego in Freud’s Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis: The Seminar of

Jacques Lacan, Book II, 1954-1955. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Norton,

1988.

—. The Ethics of Psychoanalysis: The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book VII, 1959-1960.

Trans. Dennis Porter. London: Routledge, 1992.

—. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London:

Penguin, 1977.

Plato. Symposium. Trans. Robin Waterfield. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Stavrakakis, Yannis. Lacan and the Political. London: Routledge, 1999.

IiIek, Slavoj. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso, 1989.

70 Calum Neill

Choang-tsu’s Butterfly: Objects and the Subjective Function of Fantasy 71