Archive for June, 2014

无意识的形成31

June 30, 2014

无意识的形成31
雅克、拉康
20.11.57 42

This is the whole story of the novel and it seems that to a
certain extent it is a very instructive and moral story that
could be used at the level of what we want to demonstrate.
Here then we have our Heinrich Heine who has created this
character as a background, and this character has produced with
the signifier famillionaire, the double dimension of metaphorical
creation, and on the other hand a sort of new metonymical object,
the famillionaire, whose position you can situate here and here.

这就是小说的整个故事。似乎到某个程度,这是一个具有启发性与道德教喻的故事。它能够被使用在我们想要证明的层层。在此,我们因此拥有我们的海瑞其、海因,他曾经创造这个人物,作为背景。这个人物曾经用能指创造famillionaire,这是隐喻创造的双重维度。在另一方面,这是一种新的换喻的客体,这个famillionaire,它的立场,你能够在此定位。

I showed you last day that to conceive of the existence of the
signifying creation called the famillionaire we can find here,
even though here of course attention is not drawn to this aspect
of things, all the debris, all the ordinary waste from the
reflection of a metaphorical creation on an object; namely, all
(13) the underlying signifiers, all the signifying packets into
which we can break the term famillionaire, the fames, the fama,
the infamy, in fact anything you like, the famulus, everything
that Hirsen-Hyacinth effectively is for his caricature of a boss,
Cristoforo Gumpelino.

上次我跟你们显示,所谓的famillionaire的能指意义的创造的存在,我们在此能够发现,即使在此注意力当然并不没有被吸引到事情的这个层面,所有的残骸,所有的普通的废料,从对于客体的隐喻的创造的反思,换句话说,作为基础的能指,所有的能指意义的包裹,我们将famillionaire这个术语,这个名声,这些恶名,分解成为所有的能指意义的包裹。事实上,任何你喜欢的任何东西,学者的侍从,海辛斯嘲讽老板时表现的一切。

And here in this place, we should
systematically search every time we are dealing with a formation
of the unconscious as such, for what I have called the debris of
the metonymical object which certainly, for reasons that are
altogether clear from experience, are shown to be naturally more
important when the metaphorical creation, one might say, has not
succeeded.

在此,在这个位置,我们应该系统地寻找,每当我们正在处理无意识本身的形成,因为我所谓换喻的客体的残骸。的确,因为根据精神分析非常清楚的理由,这些客体显示自然更加重要,当隐喻的创作并没有成功。我们不妨这样说。

I mean when it has culminated in nothing, as in the
case that I have just shown you of the forgetting of a name; when
the name Signorelli is forgotten to rediscover the trace of this
hollow, of this hole that we find at the level of metaphor, the
metonymical debris take on all their importance.

我的意思是,虽然它在空无里达到巅峰,如同在我刚刚跟你们显示的情况,忘掉名字。当Signorelli这个名字被忘记,为了重新发现这个空洞的痕迹,我们在隐喻的层次发现的这个空洞,换喻的残骸具有它们的重要性。

The fact that at the level of the disappearance of the term
“Herr”, it is something that forms part of the whole metonymical
context within which “Herr” is isolated, namely the context of
Bosnia Herzogovina, that allows us to restore it, takes on here
all its importance.

在这个术语的消失的层次,有某件东西形成整个换喻的内容。在这个内容里,“Herr” 被孤立出来,换句话说,Bosnia Herzogovina 的内容。它让我们能够恢复它,在此具有它的一切意义。

But let us return to our famillionaire.
Our famillionaire is produced then at the level of the message. I
(13) pointed out to you that we would find ourselves at the level
of f amillionaire when we were dealing with the metonymical
correspondences of the paradoxical formation that is produced at
the level of the forgetting of a name.

但是让我们回到famillionaire。 我们的famillionaire 当时在讯息的层次被产生。我跟你们指出,我们将会发现我们自己处于famillionaire的层次,当我们正在处理悖论形成的换喻的对应。这个悖论的形成在忘记名字的层次被产生。

In the case of Signorelli
we should also find something corresponding to the concealment,
to the disappearance of Signor, in the case of the forgetting of
a name.

在Signorelli的情况,我们也应该发现某件东西,对应于这个隐藏,对应于Signor 的消失,在忘记名字的这个情况。

We should also find it at the level of the witticism.
This is where we stopped. How can we think, reflect on what
happens at the level of famillionaire, given that the witty
metaphor has succeeded in this case? There must be something
that up to a certain point corresponds, marks in some way, the
residue, the refuse of the metaphorical creation.

我们也应该发现它,在机智语的层次。这是我们停止的地方。假如考虑到这个机智的隐喻在这个情况曾经成功,我们要如何思维,如何反思famillionaire的层次,所发生的事情?

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

无意识的形成30

June 30, 2014

无意识的形成30
雅克、拉康
20.11.57 33

I showed some equivalent things that are very like it in the
order of pure and simple parapraxes – but which on the contrary
found, in the conditions that the accident occurs, to be
registered and given a value as a meaningful phenomenon;
precisely of being a generation of meaning at the level of a
Signifying neo-formation, of a sort of co-lapsing, of signifiers
that in this instance, as Freud puts it, are compressed into one
another, stuck one against the other, and that this created
meaning, and I showed you its nuances and its enigmatic
qualities. Between what and what?

我显示跟它很相像的的相等的东西,在单纯而简单的口误的秩序。但是相反地,在意外发生的情况,发现它们被铭记与被给予一种价值,作为一个有意义的现象。
在能指意义的新的形成的层次,确实是产生意义的现象,一种共同失误,一种能指。就这个例子而言,如同弗洛依德所说,它们互相被压缩在一块,互相牴触,这个被创造的意义,我跟你们显示它的细节差异,与它的谜团般的特性。在什么与什么之间?

Between a certain evocation of
(10) a properly metaphorical manner of being: “he treated me
quite famillionairely”; and a certain evocation of a particular
type of being, a verbal being that is ready to take on the
peculiar animation whose ghost I already brandished before you
with the famillionaire;

在生命实存的合宜隐喻的方式的某种召唤:「他对待我,相当famillionairely」。与某个特别的生命实存的某种召唤之间,后者是文辞的生命实存,准备呈现这个特别的动画,这个动画的鬼魂,我已经在你们面前展示,用这个famillionaire。

the famillionaire in so far as he makes
his entry into the world as the representative of something that
is very likely to take on for us a much more consistent reality
and weight than the more hidden reality and weight of the
millionaire,

这个famillionaire,因为他进入这个世界,作为是某件东西的代表。对于我们,这个东西很可能呈现一个更加一贯的现实与份量,比起millionaire(百万富翁)那个更加隐藏的现实与重量。

but which I also showed you as having a certain
something in existence that is vivid enough to really represent a
personage characteristic of a certain historical epoque. And I
pointed out to you that Heine was not the only one to have
invented it, I talked to you about Gide’s Prometheus ill-bound
and his “miglionnaire”.

但是,这个东西,我也跟你们显示,作为拥有某件存在的东西,它足够生动地确实代表一个人物,具有某个历史时代的特色。我跟你们指出,海因并不是唯一曾经发明它的人。我跟你们谈论到纪德的「普罗米修斯的囚桎」,与他的miglionnaire。

It would be very interesting to pause for an instant at the
Gidean creation of Prometheus ill-bound. The millionaire in
Prometheus ill-bound is the banker Zeus, and there is nothing
more surprising than the way this character is elaborated. I do
not know why in our memories of Gide’s work, it is eclipsed
perhaps by the ineffable brilliance of Palude, of which it is
nonetheless a sort of correspondent and double.

耐人寻味地,让我们稍微探索一下纪德的创作「普罗米修斯的囚桎」。在「普罗米修斯的囚桎」里的millionaire(百万富翁)是银行家宙斯,最令人惊奇的事情是,这个人物被建构的方式。我不知道为什么在我们对纪德的著作的记忆,跟Palude的无与伦比的杰出相较,它或许相形失色。可是,它仍然是一种对应者与双重者。

It is the same character who is involved in both. There are many features here
(11) that overlap: the millionaire, in any case, is someone who
is found to have rather peculiar relationships with his fellows,
because it is here that we see emerge the idea of the gratuitous
act. Zeus, the banker, who is incapable of having with any other
person a true and authentic interchange, since he is identified
one might say with absolute power, with this aspect of the pure
signifier that there is in money, that questions one might say
the existence of every possible kind of significant exchange, can
find no other way of escaping from his solitude than to proceed
in the following way:

相同的这个人物牵涉到对应者与双重者。在此有许多重叠的特征;无论如何,百万富翁跟这个人物,被发现具有相当特殊的关系。因为就在这里,我们看见无缘无故的行为的观念。宙斯,这位银行家,无法跟任何其他人有任何真实而诚恳的感情交流,因为他认同于绝对的权力,我们不妨这样说。他是金钱里的纯粹能指的这一面。这个绝对权力质疑每个感情交流的可能存在。他找不到别的方式逃避孤独,除了用以下的方式前进。

as Gide puts it, to go out on the street
with in one hand an envelope containing what at the time was
something of value, a five hundred franc note, and in the other
hand a box in the ear, if one can put it like that; he lets the
envelope fall and, when someone obligingly picks it up, asks him
to write a name on the envelope, in return for which he gives him
a blow in the face.

如同纪德所表达,宙斯这位银行家在街上走路,一手拿着信封,里面装著某件有价值的东西,五百法郎的钞票,另一手拿着箱子的提把,我们不妨这样说。他让他的信封掉落,当某个人帮忙检起,要求他在信封上签名,他却打对方一个拳头,作为回报。

And it it is not for nothing that he is Zeus.
It is a tremendous blow that leaves him dazed and hurt; then he
goes off and sends the contents of the envelope to the person
whose name had been written by the person whom he had just
treated so roughly.

他是宙斯,并非没有意涵。一个巨大的打击让他晕眩与受伤。然后,他离开,将信封里面的东西送给名字写在上面的那个人,他刚刚如此粗暴地对待的那个人。

In this way he finds himself in the position of not having to
make a choice, of having compensated, one might say for a
gratuitous piece of badness by a gift that owes absolutely
(12) nothing to him.

以这种方式,他发现他自己处于并不需要做选择的力场。不妨说是,补偿的力场,补偿一个根本就不属于他的礼物的带来的无缘无故的恶行。

His choice is to restore by his action the
circuit of exchange into which he cannot introduce himself in any
way or from any angle, to participate in it in this way by
attraction, as it were, to engender a sort of debt in which he
does not participate, and all of whose consequences, which will
develop in the rest of the novel through the fact that the two
characters themselves never succeed in connecting what they owe
to one another; one will become almost blind and the other will
die of it.
他的选择就是凭借行动恢复交换的流通,他无法以任何方式或任何角度,介绍自己参与它,由于被吸引产生某种的债务,他并没有参与的债务。所有这一切都结果,在小说的其余部分发展,经由这个事实:这两个人物本身并没有成功地连接他们互相亏欠的东西。一位变得几乎是盲目于他所亏欠,另一位则因为他所亏欠的而死。

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

无意识的形成 29

June 29, 2014

无意识的形成 29
雅克、拉康
20.11.57 40
This had of course already made its appearance, but only up to a
certain point and masked in some way; masked in so far as what is
graspable at the level of discourse, of the concrete discourse,
always presents itself with respect to this generation of meaning
in an ambiguous position;
这个语言当然已经出现,但是直到某个时刻,而且以某种方式遮蔽。这个语言被遮蔽,因为在辞说的层次,具体的辞说所能够被理解的东西,总是呈现它自己,关于意义的这个产生,以模糊暧昧的立场。

this language, in effect, being already
turned towards objects that include in themselves something of
the creation that they have received from language itself and
(8) something that had already been the object precisely of a
whole tradition, even of a whole philosophical rhetoric, that
which asks the question in the most general sense of the critique
of judgement:

实际上,这个语言由于已经被转向客体,本身包含某创造的东西的客体。它们从语言本身已经接收的创造,这个某件东西确实已经是整个传统的客体,甚至是整个哲学修饰的客体,以最通俗的判断力的批判的意义,询问这个问题的东西:

what is the value of language? What do these
connections represent in relation to the connections at which
they appear to culminate? That they should even put themselves
forward as representing the connections that exist in the real
order.

语言的价值是什么?相对于它们似乎淋漓尽致的连接的这些连接代表什么?这些连接甚至应该提出自己,作为代表存在于真实秩序的各种连接。

It is at all of this, in fact, that there culminates a critical
tradition, a philosophical tradition, whose high point and summit
we can define by Kant, and already we can in a certain way
interpret, think of Kant’s critique as the most profound
questionning of every kind of reality, in so far as it is submitted
to a priori categories not only of aesthetics but also of logic.

事实上,有一个批判的传统,一个哲学的传统,在这一切,表现得淋漓尽致。这个传统的高潮与巅峰,我们能够用康德来定义。我们已经能够用某种的方式来解释,将康德的批判认为是最深刻的质疑每一种的现实。因为它们屈从于先验的范畴,不但是美学,而且是逻辑的范畴。

Here indeed is something that represents a pivotal point from
which human meditation can begin again to rediscover that
something that was not at all perceived in the way of asking the
question at the level of discourse, at the level of logical
discourse, at the level of the correspondence between a certain
syntax of the intentional circle

在此,确实有某件东西代表一种枢纽点。从这个枢纽点,人类的沉思能够再次开始重新发现,以在辞说的层次,在逻辑的层次,在意图的循环的某个句法的对应的层次,询问这个问题,根本就没有感知到的东西。

in so far as it is closed in each sentence, to take it up again right through this book on the critique of logical discourse, to reconsider again the action of
the word in this creative chain in which it is always capable of
engendering new meanings, most obviously by means of metaphor;
(9) and by way of metonymy in a fashion that – I will explain why
in due course – has up to recent times always remained profoundly
masked.

因为这个意图的循环被封闭在每个句子里,再次探讨它,根据针对逻辑辞说批判的这本书,再次重新考虑这个字段行动,在这个创造的锁链。在那里,它总是能够产生新的意义。使用的方式,直到最近,始终是深刻地受到遮蔽。到时候,我还解释为什么。

This introduction is already difficult enough to make me return
to my example of famillionaire and to make us try here to
complete it.

这个介绍已经足够困难,让我回到famillionaire的例子,并且让我们在此尝试完成它。

We only arrived at this notion in the course of an intentional
discourse in which, while the subject presents himself as wishing
to say something, something else is produced that goes beyond his
wish, something that presents itself as an accident, as a
paradox, as a scandal, a neo-formation, that appears with certain
features that are not at all the negative ones of a sort of
stumbling like in a parapraxis which is what it might have been –

我们仅是到达这个观念,在一个意图性的辞说的过程。在那里,主体呈现它自己,作为希望说出某件东西,某件其他东西被产生,超越这个愿望,某件东西呈现它自己,作为是一个意外,作为一个悖论,作为一个丑闻,一个新的形成。它出现,带有某些的特征,这些特征根本就不是某种胡言乱语的负面的特征,类似于某种的口误表明看起来的样子。

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

无意识的形成 28

June 28, 2014

无意识的形成 28
雅克、拉康
20.11.57 39
But naming them is not what is important. The core of what he
puts forward, the key to his analysis is this recognition of
common structural laws. This, as he says, is how you recognize
that a process has been drawn into the unconscious. It is what
is structured according to the laws, structured according to
their types. This is what is in question when the unconscious is
in question.

但是命名它们并非重要的事情。弗洛伊德提出的东西的核心,他的精神分析的关键是要体认出共通的结构的价值。如他所说,这就是你体认的方式:过程已经被吸收到无意识里。这就是依照法则所作为结构的东西,依照它们的类型作为结构的东西。这就是受到质疑的东西,当无意识受到质疑。

What happens then? What happens at the level of what I am
teaching you, is that we are now able, that is after Freud, to
recognize this event that is all the more demonstrative because
it is really extremely surprising.

那么,发生什么事情呢?在我正在教导你们的东西的层次,所发生的事情是,追随弗洛依德之后,我们现在能够体认出这个事件。这个事件更加具有展示性,因为它确实极端令人吃惊。

That these laws, this
structure of the unconscious, that by which a phenomenon can be
recognized as belonging to the formations of the unconscious is
strictly identifiable with, overlaps, and I would even say
further, overlaps in an exhaustive fashion what linguistic
analysis allows us to detect as being the essential modes of the
(6) formation of meaning, in so far as this meaning is engendered
by combinations of signifiers.

这些法则,无意识的这个结构,凭借它,现象能够被体认出来,作为归属于无意识的形成的东西,可严谨地被辨认出来。它重叠,我甚至不妨更深入地说,它重叠,以语言学的分析容许我们觉察的穷尽一切的方式重叠,作为是基本上是意义形成的基本模式。因为这个意义被产生,根据各种能指的联结。

The term signifier takes on its full meaning from a certain
moment in the evolution of linguistics, that at which there is
isolated the notion of the signifying element, a notion very
closely linked in the actual history to the separating out of the
notion of the phoneme.

从语言学的进化的某个时刻开始,能指这个术语就具有它充分的意义。能指意义的元素的观念在语言学被揭示出来。这个观念跟语素的观念的分隔出来的实际历史息息相关。

Since it is uniquely localized by its
associations with this notion, the notion of signifier, in so far
as it allows us to take language at the level of a certain
elementary register, can be doubly defined, on the one hand as a
diachronic chain, and, as a possibility within this chain, of a
permanent possibility of substitution in the synchronic sense.

因为它独特地被找出位置,凭借跟这个观念的联想,能指的这个观念。因为它让我们能够在某个初级的铭记接纳语言。它能够双重地被定义;一方面,作为历时性的锁链;另一方面,作为这个锁链里面的可能性,根据共时性的意义,作为替换的永久价值。

This grasp at an elementary level of the functions of the
signifier is a recognition at the level of this function of an
original power which is precisely that in which we can localize a
certain generation of something called meaning, and something
that in itself is very rich in psychological implications, and
that receives a kind of complement, without even needing to push
any further its own way, its research, to plough any further its
own furrow, in what Freud himself had already prepared for us at
this point of conjunction between the field of linguistics and
the proper field of psychoanalysis.

从能指的功能的初级层次的这种理解,是从原初的力量的这个功能的层次的体认。这个原初的力量,确实就是我们在那里能够找出某件所谓的意义的东西某个产生的位置。这个东西非常富有心理学的意涵,它接收某种的辅助,它甚至不需要更进一步前进,或探索,不需要更深入挖掘它自己的犁耕。在弗洛依德自己已经为我们准备好的东西,在语言学的领域与精神分析的本土领域之间的联结的这个时刻。

It is to show us that these
psychological effects, that these effects of the generation of
(7) meaning are nothing other than this, and overlap exactly what
Freud show us as being the formations of the unconscious.

它要跟我们显示,这些心理的影响,意义产生的这些影响,实实在在就是这个,并且确实重叠,跟弗洛依德告诉我们的东西重叠,作为无意识的形成的东西。

In other words, we are able to grasp something that remained
elided up to then in what can be called the place of man, and it
is precisely this: the relationship that there is between the
fact that for him there exist objects of a heterogeneity, of a
diversity, of a variability that is truly surprising compared to
the biological objects that we could expect as corresponding to
his existence as a living organism, namely something particular
that presents a certain style, a certain superabundant and
luxuriant diversity, and at the same time something impossible to
grasp as such as a biological object, something that comes from
the world of human objects, something that is found in this
instance to be closely and indissolubly related to the
submission, to the subduction, of the human being by the
phenomenon of language.

换句话说,我们能够理解直到当时始终失落的某件东西,在所谓的人的位置。
确实就是这个:对人而言,存在着异质性的各种客体,多样性的各种客体,变异的各种客体。这个事实之间的关系确实令人惊奇,跟生物的各种客体比较起来。我们能够预期生物的各种客体,作为对应于他作为生命有机体的存在。换句话说,某件特殊的东西呈现某种的风格,某种的超级丰富与奢华的多样性。同时,它本身作为生物的客体,又是不可能理解的东西,某件来自人的各种客体的世界。在这个例子里,这个东西被发现息息相关,跟人类由于语言的现象,受到屈服,受到压制息息相关,密不可分。

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

无意识的形成 27

June 27, 2014

无意识的形成 27
雅克、拉康
20.11.57 38

There is no need to refer to it since a simple, sincere inspection of the life of any one of us helps us to see that this so-called power of synthesis is more than held in check; and that really, unless we are dealing in fiction, there
is nothing more common in experience than what we can call not
just the incoherence of our motives, but even more, I would say
the sentiment of their profound lack of motivation, of their
fundamental alienation.

没有必要提到它。因为假如我们单纯而诚恳地检视我们任何一位的生活,我们将会看出,这个所谓的综合的力量相当受到约束。而且确实地,除非我们正在处理幻想,在精神分析经验里,最为常见的就是,我们所谓的不仅是我们动机的不一贯,尤有甚者,我不妨说,这些动机深深欠缺触动的情感,这些动机基本的异化的情感。

So that if Freud puts forward a notion of
the subject that operates beyond this, this subject that is so
difficult to grasp in ourselves, if he shows us its sources and
its action, there is something that should always have given us
pause, namely that this subject – in so far as it introduces a
hidden unity, a secret unity into what is apparent to us at the
most banal level of experience, our profound division, our
profound fragmentation, our profound alienation with respect to
(4) our own motives – that this subject is other.

因此,假如弗洛依德提出主体的观念,超越这个运作的主体,在我们自身如此难以理解的主体,假如弗洛依德告诉我们主体的来源与主体的行动,有某件东西应该让我们停顿一下。换句话说,这位主体,因为它介绍一种隐藏的一致性,一个秘密的一致性,在我们即使是最寻常的经验里,对于我们甚为明显的东西。我们深刻的区分,我们深刻的碎片化,我们深刻的异化,关于我们自己的动机—这个主体是别的。

Is it simply a kind of double, a subject that is perhaps a bad
ego, as some have said, since in fact it conceals some rather
surprising tendencies, or simply another ego, or as you might
rather think I am saying, the true ego? Is that really what is in
question? Is it simply an understudy, purely and simply an other
whom we can conceive of as being structured like the ego of our
experience?

这仅是一种双重者,主体或许是坏的自我,如同某些人曾经说过。因为事实上,主体隐藏某些相当令人惊奇的倾向,或是仅是隐藏另外一个自我,或者,如同你可能认为我正在说的,主体隐藏真实的自我。那确实就是受到质疑的东西吗?主体仅是替身演员,仅是我们构想到一位他者?作为像我们精神分析经验的自我的结构的他者?

That is the question, and that is also why we approach it this
year at the level and under the title of formations of the
unconscious.

那就是问题。那也是为什么我们今年探讨它,在无意识的形成的层次与标题之下。

The question is of course already present, and offers a response.
It is not structured in the same way: in this experiential I
(moi) something is presented that has its own laws. It has in
fact an organization of its formations, and has not only a style
but also a particular structure.

这个问题当然已经存在,并且提供一种回答。主体并不是以相同方式作为结构:在这个经验的「我」当中,某件拥有它自己的法则的东西被呈现。实际上,主体具有它的形成的组织,它不但有风格,而且有特殊的结构。

Freud approaches this structure
and deconstructs it at the level of neuroses, at the level of
symptoms, at the level of dreams, at the level of parapraxes, at
the level of the witticism. He recognizes it as being unique and
homogeneous.

弗洛依德探索并且解构它,从神经症的层次,从病征的层次,从梦的层次,从口误的层次,从机智语的层次。弗洛依德体认出主体,作为是独特而且是同质性。。

The whole core of what he exposes to us at the
level of the witticism, and this is the reason why I chose it as
a point of entry, rests on this; it is his fundamental argument
for making of the witticism a manifestation of the unconscious.

弗洛依德在机智语的层次跟我们揭露的东西的整个核心,依靠这个。这就是为什么我选择它作为一个进入点。弗洛依德的基本论点,就是让机智语成为无意识的展示。

This means that it is structured, that it is organized according
(5) to the same laws as those we find in the dream. He recalls
these laws to us, he enumerates them, he articulates them, he
recognizes them in the structure of the witticism.

这意味着,主体的结构,主体被组织,依照相同的法则,跟我们在梦里发现的法则相同。弗洛依德跟我们提醒这些法则,他列举这些法则,他表达这些法则,他在机智语的结构里体认出这些法则。

They are the
laws of condensation; the laws of displacement; essentially and
above all something of the other adheres to them; he also
recognizes in them what I translated at the end of my article as
égards aux nécessités de la mise en scene (tr: considerations of
representability). He introduces this also as a third element.

这些法则就是凝缩的法则,替换的法者。基本上,尤其重要的是,他者的某件东西坚持这些法则。弗洛依德也在这些法则当中体认出,我在我的文章结束时翻译的东西,作为再现表象的考虑。弗洛依德也介绍这个,作为第三个元素。

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

客体关系

June 26, 2014

THE SEMINAR OF

JACQUES LACAN

拉康研讨班

Edited by Jacques-Alain Miller

亚伦、米勒编辑

BOOK IV

第四研讨班

The Object Relation 1956-1957

客体关系 1956-1957

 

TRANSLATED WITH NOTES BY

L. V. A ROCHE

英译及注释者:洛基

 

CONTENTS

内容

 

A THEORY OF OBJECT LACK

客体欠缺的理论

 

I Introduction导论

II The three forms of object lack客体欠缺的三种形式

III The signifier and the Holy Spirit能指与神圣精神

IV The dialectic of frustration挫折的辩证法

V  On bundling as analysis, and its consequences

   论契合作为精神分析及其结果

 

PERVERSE PATHS OF DESIRE

欲望的变态途径

 

VI  The primacy of the phallus and the young homosexual girl

    阳具的原初性与年轻的同性恋女孩

VII 1.:, A Child is Being Beaten and the young homosexual girl

    小孩正在被打与年轻同性恋女孩

VIII WS Dora and the young homosexual girl

     朵拉与年轻同性恋女孩

 

THE FETISH OBJECT

物化的客体

 

DC The function of the veil

    面纱的功能

X Identification with the phallus

   阳具的认同

XI  The phallus and the unsatiated mother

    阳具与无法满足的母亲

 

A THEORY OF OBJECT LACK

客体欠缺的理论

 

I

INTRODUCTION

导引

The Z-shaped schema.

Z-形状的基模

 

The object, lost and refound.

客体,丧失及重新找到

 

珍珠

The object, anxiety, the hole.

客体,焦虑,空洞

 

The fetish and the phobic object.

物神化与恐惧的客体

 

This year we shall speak on a topic to which the historical evolution of

psychoanalysis, or what is thus named, might give a central position in

theory and in practice, whether in a way that is explicit or not.

 

今年我们将谈论的题目,是精神分析的历史的进展,或因此被给予命名的题目。这个题目在理论及实践可能具有中心的位置,无论是其方式明白表达与否。

 

This topic is the object relation.

 

这个题目就是客体关系

 

Why did I not choose that when we began these seminars, since it was

already current, primary, critical? Precisely for the reason which motivates

the second part of my title — and Freudian structures.

 

为什么当我们开始这些研讨班时,我并没有选择那个题目,既然它当时已经存在,作为初级及关键性?确实是因为触发我的标题的第二部分:弗洛依德的结构。

 

This topic could be treated, in effect, only after a certain distance had

been taken on the question. We had first to consider the structures in

which Freud has shown us that analysis takes place and operates,

especially the .complex structure of the relation between the two subjects

present in analysis, the analysand, and the analyst. It is to this that our

three years of commentary and criticism of Freud’s texts have been

dedicated, as I shall recall for you briefly.

 

实际上,只有针对这个问题保持距离,这个题目才能够被处理。我们首先必须考虑弗洛依德告诉我们的这个结构,精神分析发生与运作的这个结构,特别是存在于精神分析的两个主体之间的关系的复杂结构,分析者与分析家。我不妨简短地提醒你们,我们三年来的评论于批评弗洛依德的文本,就一直致力于这一点。

 

 

The first year dealt with the very elements of the technical management

of the cure, that is, with the ideas of transference and resistance. The

second year was concerned with the foundation of the Freudian experience

and discovery, namely, the idea of the unconscious, which I believe I have

sufficiently shown to be what obliged Freud to introduce the principles,

literally paradoxical on the dialectical plane, which figure in Beyond thePleasure Principle. Finally, during the course of the third year, I gave you aclear example of the absolute necessity of isolating that essential

articulation of symbolism which is called the signifier, in order to

understand anything at all, analytically speaking, of the strictly paranoiacfield of the psychoses.

 

第一年用在处理治疗的技术管理的元素,也就是,移情与抗拒的观念。第二年专注于弗洛依德的精神分析经验与发现的基础,也就是无意识的观念。我相信我已经充分表达它,作为是弗洛依德不得不介绍的那些原则,实质上在辩证法的层面是个悖论。对于这个绝对的必要,我曾经给出一个清楚的例子,要将所谓的能指的象征主义的那种基本表达孤立出来,为了理解任何东西。就精神分析而言,那就是精神病纯属妄想症的领域。

 

 

 

At the end of these three years of criticism, we are thus armed with a

certain number of terms and schemas. The spatiality of the latter is not to

be taken in the intuitive sense of the term schema, but in another perfectlylegitimate, sense, which is topological — it is not a matter of

localizations, but of the relations between places, interposition,

for example, or succession, sequence. Our elaboration culminates in a

schema that we can call the schema, which is the following –

 

在批评的这三年结束时,我们因此具备有某些的术语与基模。基模的空间无法用术语与基模的直觉意义来接纳,而是用另外一个非常合理的意义,也就是拓扑学的意义。这并不是各别的位置的问题,而是各个位置之间的关系的问题。譬如,交互位置,或连续位置,系列位置。我们的建构以我们所谓的这个基模,最为淋漓尽致。这个基模如下:

 

 

[Diagram, p. 12.]

(Es) S . . o’ other

(Ego) o . . 0 Other

 

THE SCHEMA

基模

 

This schema initially provides a notation of the relation of the subject

to the Other. As it is constituted at the beginning of analysis, it is a

relation, of virtual speech by  which he subject receives his own message

from the Other, in the form of speech which is unconscious.

 

这个基模最初供应主体跟大他者的关系的铭记。因为它在精神分析的开始被建构,这是虚拟言说的关系。主体凭借虚拟言说,接收他自己从大他者传递过来的讯息。

形式上是无意义的言说。

 

 This

message is, forbidden him, it is profoundly misconstrued [

meconnu] it is deformed, arrested, intercepted, because of the

interception of the imaginary relation

 

between o and o’, between the ego and the other, which is its typical

object. The imaginary relation, which is essentially an alienated relation,

interrupts, slows down, inhibits, usually inverts, and profoundly

misconstrues the speech relation between the subject and the Other, the

great Other, in so far as this is another subject, a subject par excellence

capable of deceiving.

 

这个讯息,由于被禁止给他,深深地被错误解释。这个讯息受到扭曲,组碍,拦截,因为在o o’之间,在自我与他者之间的想像的关系受到拦截,因为他者是自我的客体。想像的关系基本上是异化的关系。这个关系会干涉,缓慢,潜抑,通常还会逆转,深深地错误解释主体与大他者,这位伟大的大他者之间的言说关系。因为这是另外一个主体,能够欺骗的无与伦比的主体。

 

 

2

 

It is not in vain to have introduced this schema into analytic experience,

seeing how that is formulated today by an ever increasing number of

analysts, who give prevalence in analytic theory to the object

without, however, sufficiently commenting on it.

 

将这个基模介绍进入精神分析经验并非徒劳。因为我们看到,今天越来越多的精神分析家如何说明那个基模。那些精神分析家在精神分析理论里,优先探讨客体,可是,并没有充分地给予评论。

 

They recenter the

dialectic of the pleasure principle and the reality principle upon it, and

they found analytic progress upon a rectification of the subject’s relation to

the object, considered as a dual relation, which is, they then say, in

speaking of the analytic situation, extremely simple. This relation of

subject to object, which tends more and more to occupy the center of

analytic theory, is precisely what we shall put to test.

 

他们将快乐原则与现实原则对它的辨证法重新定为核心。他们将精神分析的进步的基础,建立在主体与客体的关系的矫正上。这个关系被认为是双重关系。他们因此说,当我们谈论到精神分析的情境时,这个双重关系极端简单。主体与客体的这个关系越来越倾向于佔据精神分析理论的核心。这个关系确实就是我们将要检验的的东西。

 

 

Once the object relation considered as dual is seen to correspond

precisely to line o-o’ of our schema, can one thus construct a

satisfactory whole from the phenomena offered to observation in analytic

experience? Does this instrument all by itself allow us to reply to the

facts? Can the more complex schema that we have suggested be put aside,

indeed, must it be discarded?

 

被认为是双重的客体关系,一旦被视为确实对应于我们基模的o-o’这条线,我们因此就能够根据精神分析经验提供作为观察的这些现象,来建构一个令人满意的整体吗?这个工具的本身让我们能够回答这些事实吗?我们曾经建议过的比较复杂的基模能够被搁置一旁吗?的确。这个基模必须被抛弃吗?

 

That the object relation has become, at least in appearance, the principal

theoretical element in analytical explanation, is something that I can

demonstrate to you from a recently published Collective work, to which, infact, the term collective applies particularly well.’ I cannot say that I am

inviting you to delve into it. You will see object relations overvalued and

promoted from one end to the other in a way that is not always very

satisfying in its articulation, but whose monotony and uniformity are

surely striking. You will see the object relation promoted in art article

entitled Evolution de la psychanalyse, and, as the final term in this

evolution, you will see in the article, La Clinique psychanalytique, a

presentation of clinical work which centers it entirely upon the object

relation. Perhaps I might give you some idea of where such a presentation

can lead.

 

至少在外表上,客体关系已经成为精神分析解释的主要的理论因素.这是我能够跟你们展示的东西,根据最近出版的集体的著作。实际上,「集体」这个术语应用在那里特别贴切。你们将会看出客体关系被过分高估,而且从一个极端被提升到另一个极端。使用的方式在表达上未必令人满意。但是它们的单调与步调一致确实是令人注目。有一篇题名「精神分析的进化」的艺术文章,你们将会看出客体关系被大力提倡,并且作为进化的最后术语。还有一篇文章,题名「临床精神分析」,你们将会看到临床工作的呈现将它的核心集中于客体关系。或许我可以告诉你们,这样的呈现会导致什么?

 

3

 

Taken as a whole, the collection is quite striking. One sees analytic

practitioners try to organize their thinking and the understanding they

might have of their own experience around the object relation, without its

seeming to give them full and complete satisfaction, but, on the other

hand, not without its orienting their practice and penetrating it most

profoundly. One cannot say that the fact that they conceive their

experience in these terms is without consequence in their modes of

intervention, in the orientation given to the analysis, and also its results.

 

「集体」,就整体而言,是相当令人注目的。我们看见精神分析的执业者尝试组织他们对自己的经验的思想与理解,环绕这个客体关系。但是这样的组织思想与理解并没有让他们充分及完整地满意。在另一方面,却仍然让他们的执业有所取向,并且相当深刻地透视。我们无法说,他们用这些术语构想他们的经验,作为介入的模式,是一无所得,作为被给予精神分析,也给予精神分析的结果的取向。

 

That is what one cannot possibly fail to recognize [meconnaitre], in simply

reading them. Analytic theory and practice, it has always been said, cannot

be dissociated, and from the moment that one conceptualizes the

experience in a particular way, it is inevitable that it will also be directed in

that way. Certainly, the practical results can only be partially glimpsed.

 

那就是我们一定会体认出来的东西,当我们仅在阅读它们时。据说,精神分析理论与实践无法被拆离,并且从我们以特殊方式构想精神分析经验的时刻开始,它无可避免地也被以那种方式引导。的确,精神分析实践的结果,有时仅能部分被瞥见。

 

 

To introduce the question of the object relation, and more precisely the

question whether or not it is legitimate and sound to give it a central place

in analytic theory, I shall remind you at least briefly of what this concept

owes, or does not owe, to Freud himself. I shall do so because for us

starting with a commentary on Freud is a sort of guide, and almost a

technical limitation that we have imposed upon ourselves.

 

为了介绍客体关系的问题,更贴切地说,为了介绍这个问题:在精神分析理论,给予客体关系一个中心的位置是否合理的问题。我至少将简短地提醒你们,这个构想要归功于弗洛依德自己的什么东西。我将这样做,因为对于我们,从凭论弗洛依德作为开始,是一种引导,几乎是我们赋加给我们自己的一种技术的限制。

 

Moreover, this year I have sensed in you some questions, if not

disquiet, as to whether I would or would not start off with Freudian texts.

And no doubt it is very difficult, with regard to the object relation, to start

from Freud’s texts themselves, because the object relation is not in them. I

am of course speaking of what is here very strictly taken to be a deviation

in analytic theory. I must therefore start with recent texts and at the same

time, with a critique of their positions. On the other hand, there is no

doubt that we must ultimately refer to the Freudian position, and, at the

same time, we cannot avoid dealing, even if very rapidly, with what

revolves around the very notion of the object in the fundamental themes

that are strictly Freudian.

 

而且,今年我已经在你们身上感觉到一些问题,甚至是令人不安的问题,关于我是否愿意从弗洛依德的文本开始。无可置疑地,关于客体关系,要从弗洛依德文本自身开始相当困难。因为客体关系并没有在那些文本里面。当然,我是谈论在精神分析理论,在此严格被认为是偏离的东西。因此,我必须从最近的文本开始,同时从批判这些文本的立场开始。在另一方面,无可置疑地,我们最后必须提到弗洛依德的立场。同时,我们无法避免去处理,即使是快速地处理,环绕客体的这个观念的东西,严格来说,这些是弗洛依德学派的基本主题。

 

4

 

We cannot do that at the beginning in a way that is fully spelled out. It

is precisely at the end that we shall come back to it, and that we shall be

able to articulate it.

 

我们无法从一开始,就以充分解释的方式来从事。确实在结束时,我们才会回到它。我们才能够表达它。

 

I want, therefore, simply to make a brief reminder that this would not

even be conceivable if there were not behind us three years of

collaboration in textual analysis, and if we had not already encountered

the theme of the object in its various forms.

 

我因此仅是简短地提醒,假如在我们背后,没有前三年对于文本分析的合作,假如我们不是已经遭遇到具有各种形式的客体的这个主题,我们甚至无法构想要从事它。

 

1

Freud, of course, speaks of the object. The final part of Three Essays on

the Theory of Sexuality is called precisely “The Finding of an Object”, “Die

Objektfindung”. One is implicitly speaking of the object each time that the

notion of reality comes into play.

 

当然,弗洛依德谈论到客体。「性学理论三论文」的最后部分,确实可被称为是「客体的发现」。每当现实界的观念运作时,我们暗示地谈论这个客体。

 

 

5

One speaks of it in yet a third waywhenever the ambivalence of certain fundamental relations is brought

into play — namely, the fact that the subject makes himself an object for the

other, the fact that there is a particular type of relation in which reciprocity

with regard to an object is patent, and is even a constituent fact.

 

 

每当某些基本的关系的爱恨交加被运作时,我们还以第三种方式谈论客体。换句话说,主体让他自己成为他者的客体的这个事实。关于客体,互惠成为专有的特殊种类的关系的这个事实,这甚至是结构组织的事实。

 

 

I would like to put the strongest emphasis on the three modes in which

notions relative to the object before us appear. If you look at Chapter Three

of the Three Essays, you will see something which was already there at the

time that Freud wrote the Entwurf, a text which, I remind you, was only

published by a sort of historical accident, for not only did Freud prefer not

to publish it, but one might say that it was published against his will. Still,

in looking at this first sketch of his psychology, we find the same formula

with regard to the object.

 

我想要特别强调这三种模式,在我们之前跟客体相关的观念出现的三种模式。假如你们阅读「性学理论三论文」的第三章,你们将会发现某件东西已经在那里,就是弗洛依德写作Entwurf(筹划)的文本时。我提醒你们,「筹划」这个文本仅是由于历史的意外才被出版。因为不仅弗洛依德宁可不要出版,而且我们可以说,是违背他的意志被出版。可是,当我们阅读他的心里的这个首次素描,我们找到跟客体相关的相同的公式。

 

 

 

Freud insists that for man, every means to

finding the object is, and is ever, only the pursuit of a drive [tendance] in

which what is at stake is a lost object, an object to be refound.

 

         弗洛依德坚持,每个发现客体的工具仅是,而且永远仅是冲动的追寻。在那里,岌岌可危的东西是失落的客体,应该被重新找到的客体。

 

It is not at all a matter of the object considered in modern theory as

being the fully satisfying object, the typical object, the object par excellence,

the harmonious object, the object that founds man in an adequate reality,

in the reality which gives proof of maturity — the famous genital object.

 

这根本就不是从现代理论考虑的客体的问题,作为充分令人满足的客体,这种典型的客体,无与伦比的客体,和谐的客体,在充足的现实界作为人的基础的客体,在给予成熟的证据的现实界—这个著名的生殖的客体。

 

 

It

is striking to see that at the moment when he fabricates the theory of

instinctual development as it was revealed in the earliest analytic

experiences, Freud indicates that the object is grasped by means of a search

for the lost object. The object that corresponds to an advanced state of

instinctual maturation is an object found again, the refound object of early

weaning, the object that first formed the point of attachment in the child’s

earliest satisfactions.

 

令人注目地,我们看见,弗洛依德在最早期的精神分析经验显示,他建构本能理论的发展的理论时,他显示,对于客体的掌握,是凭借对于失落客体的寻找。对应于本能成熟时的高度状态的客体,是再次被找到的客体,早期短奶的重新找到的客体,在小孩最早期的满足时,情感依附点首次被形成的客体。

 

It is clear that a discordance is established by the mere fact of this

repetition. A nostalgia binds the subject to a lost object, and directs the

entire effort of the search. It marks the newly found object

with the sign of

an impossible repitition since this is precisely not the same object — it could

never be.

 

显而易见,仅是重复的这个事实,就证明不和谐的存在。主体的怀旧跟失落的客体联接一块,并且引导这种寻求的整个努力。它用不可能的重复的记号,标示最近被找到的客体。因为这并不是相同的客体—它永远不可能是相同的客体。

 

 

6

 

The primacy of this dialectic puts a fundamental tension at the

center of the subject-object relation, which means that what is sought is

not sought in the same way as what will be found.

 

这个辩证的原初性将基本的紧张摆放在主体与客体的关系的核心。这意味着,所被寻求的东西,跟将会被找到的东西,方式并不一样。

 

It isthe search for a satisfaction past and outgrown that the new object is

sought and it is found and embraced elsewhere it was sought.

 

新的客体被寻求,就是为了寻求过去与瀰漫的满足。它在以前被找到地方之外被找到,被接纳。

 

There is a fundamental distance introduced by the essentially conflictual

element which all search for the object entails. This is the first form in

which the relation to the object appears in Freud.

 

这个基本的冲突的因素介绍一个基本的距离,对于这个客体的一切寻找涵盖这个因素。这就在弗洛依德那里,跟客体关系出现的第一个形式。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

精神分析的侵凌性 3/4

June 3, 2014

A point, let it be said in passing, whose anthropological
implications cannot be too highly stressed. What concerns us here is the function that I shall call the pacifying function of the ego ideal, the connexion between its libidinal
normativity and a cultural normativity bound up from the dawn of history with the imago
of the father. Here, obviously, lies the import that Freud’s work, Totem and Taboo, still
retains, despite the mythical circularity that vitiates it, in so far as it derives from the
mythological event, the murder of the father, the subjective dimension that gives this
event meaning, namely, guilt.

让我们顺便提到,有一点,它具有人类学的暗示,无论如何强调也不过分。我们在此所关心的事情,是我所谓的自我理想具有安抚的功能,它的生命力比多的规范,与文化的规范之间的联结,自古以来,它就跟父亲的意象息息相关。在此,显而易见地,弗洛依德的著作「图腾与禁忌」的意义就在那里。尽管神秘的流通让它无效,因为它从神话事件得来,它依旧保留弑父 ,给予这个事件的意义的主体性维度,那就是罪恶感。

Freud shows us, in fact, that the need to participate, which neutralizes the conflict
inscribed after the murder in the situation of rivalry between the brothers, is the basis of
the identification with the paternal Totem. Thus the Oedipal identification is that by
which the subject transcends the aggressivity that is constitutive of the primary subjective
individuation. I have stressed elsewhere how it constitutes a step in the establishment of
that distance by which, with feelings like respect, is realized a whole affective
assumption of one’s neighbour.

实际上,弗洛依德跟我们显示,参与的必要让这个冲突中立,在兄弟之间的敌意的情况,弑父之后被铭记的冲突。这个参与的需要就是认同父亲的图腾的基础。因此,伊狄浦斯的认同是,主体超越作为原初的主体的个人主义的结构的侵凌性。我曾经在别处强调,它如何构成建立距离的步骤。凭借这个距离,对于邻居的情感的假设被实现,对于像尊敬这样的情感。

Only the anti-dialectical mentality of a culture which, in order to be dominated by
objectifying ends, tends to reduce all subjective activity to the being of the ego, can
justify the astonishment of a Van den Steinen when confronted by a Bororo who says:
‘I’m an ara.’

只有反对辩证的精神的文化,才会认为史坦因的惊奇是有道理,当他面对一位博罗罗人对他说:「我是鹦鹉」。这样的文化精神倾向于将主体性的活动,还原为自我的生命实存,为了要受到客体化的目的所支配。

And all the sociologists of ‘the primitive mind’ busy themselves around this
profession of identity, which, on reflexion, is no more surprising than declaring, ‘I’m a
doctor’ or ‘I’m a citizen of the French Republic’, and which certainly presents fewer
logical difficulties than the statement, ‘I’m a man’, which at most can mean no more
than, ‘I’m like he whom I recognize to be a man, and so recognize myself as being such.’
In the last resort, these various formulas are to be understood only in reference to the
truth of ‘I is an other’, an observation that is less astonishing to the intuition of the poet
than obvious to the gaze of the psychoanalyst.

所有探索「原始心灵」的社会学家,孜孜从事于研究这种认同的工作。仔细思维之下,博罗罗的人这种认同,并不足为奇,如同有人宣称「我是医生」,或是「我是法国共和国的公民」。这种认同的工作呈现的逻辑的困难,并不难理解,如同有人陈述:「我是一个人」。他的意思充其量仅是「我体认他是人,我是像他这样的人,所以我体认为自己是这样的人。」追根究底,这些不同的公式,仅是应该从「我是一位他者」的真理来理解。这样的观察,与其说是让诗人的直觉感到惊奇,不如说是让精神分析家的洞见显而易见。

Who, if not us, will question once more the objective status of this ‘I’, which a
historical evolution peculiar to our culture tends to confuse with the subject? This
anomaly should be manifested in its particular effects on every level of language, and
first and foremost in the grammatical subject of the first person in our languages, in the ‘I
love’ that hypostatizes the tendency of a subject who denies it. An impossible mirage in
linguistic forms among which the most ancient are to be found, and in which the subject
appears fundamentally in the position of being determinant or instrumental of action.

除了我们精神分析家,还有谁会再次质疑这个「我」的客体的地位?这是我们文化特有的历史的进化倾向于将「我」的客体地位跟主体混淆。在语言的每个层面,这种异常混淆应该会在它的特殊的影响里被展示出来。尤其重要的是,在我们的语言里,第一人称作为文法的主词。在否认它的主体的倾向被,认为是真实的「我爱」。在语言的各种形式里,这是一个不可能的幻象,即使是最古老的语言形式也能够被找到。在这些语言形式里,主体出现,基本上是从决定行动或作为工具的立场。

Let us leave aside the critique of all the abuses of the cogito ergo sum, and recall that,
in my experience, the ego represents the centre of all the resistances to the treatment of
symptoms.

让我们将「我思故我在」的各种浮滥使用的批判放置一旁,提醒一下,在我的精神分析经验里,自我代表所有的抗拒的核心,抗拒对于病征的治疗。

It was inevitable that analysis, after stressing the reintegration of the tendencies
excluded by the ego, in so far as they are subjacent to the symptoms that it tackled in the
first instance, and which were bound up for the most part with the failures of Oedipal
identification, should eventually discover the ‘moral’ dimension of the problem.

这是无可避免的,精神分析强调被自我排除的这些倾向的合并,因为它们迹近于它起初克服的病征。它们跟伊狄浦斯认同的失败,大部分都息息相关。精神分析最后发现这个难题的「道德」维度。

And, in a parallel fashion, there came to the forefront the role played by the aggressive
tendencies in the structure of the symptoms and of the personality, on the one hand, and,
on the other, all sorts of conceptions that stressed the value of the liberated libido, one of
the first of which can be attributed to French psychoanalysts under the register of
oblativity.

同样地,在前台至关紧要的事,一方面,是病征的结构与人格的结构里,侵凌性的倾向扮演的角色,。另一方面,是各种强调生命力比多被解放的价值的观念。前者有一项能够被归功于精神分析家,被铭记为「爱是牺牲」。

It is clear, in effect, that genital libido operates as a supersession, indeed a blind
supersession, of the individual in favour of the species, and that its sublimating effects in
the Oedipal crisis lie at the origin of the whole process of the cultural subordination of man.

显而易见,那些性器官的生命力比多运作作为一种牺牲的替代。的确,这是一种盲目的牺性替代,为了种族而牺牲个人。它在伊狄浦斯的危机里,具有升华的影响,作为人隶属于文化的整个过程的起源。

Nevertheless, one cannot stress too strongly the irreducible character of the
narcissistic structure, and the ambiguity of a notion that tends to ignore the constancy of
aggressive tension in all moral life that involves subjection to this structure: in fact no
notion of oblativity could produce altruism from that structure.

可是,我们无论如何也要强调,自恋结构具有无法化减的特性,以及在一切的道德生活里,
侵凌性紧张作为常态,倾向于受到忽视的观念的暧昧性。因为一切的道德生活都牵涉到隶属于这个结构。事实上,再多的「爱是牺牲」的观念,都无法从那个结构产生出利他主义。

And that is why La
Rochefoucauld could formulate his maxim, in which his rigour matches the fundamental
theme of this thought, on the incompatibility of marriage and sexual pleasure (délices).

那就是为什么罗歇福柯能够侃侃而谈他的道德箴言:婚姻与性的快乐彼此不和谐。在他的道德箴言里,他的一板正经跟他思想的基本主题,不相上下。

We would allow the sharpness of our experience to become blunted if we deluded
ourselves, if not our patients, into believing in some kind of pre-established harmony that
would free of all aggressive induction in the subject the social conformisms made
possible by the reduction of symptoms.

我们将会让我们精神分析的敏锐变得迟钝,假如我们欺骗自己,甚至欺骗我们的病人,让大家相信,有某种预先建立的和谐,会让适应社会机能者,解除主体身上的一切侵凌性的诱导,以及病征的减少能够让大家适应社会的机能。

And the theoreticians of the Middle Ages showed another kind of penetration, by
which the problem of love was discussed in terms of the two poles of a ‘physical’ theory
and an ‘ecstatic’ theory, each involving the re-absorption of man’s ego, whether by reintegration
into a universal good, or by the effusion of the subject towards an object
without alterity.

中世纪的理论家显示另外一种洞察力。他们用「生理」理论与「狂喜」理论的两个极端,来探讨爱的难题。每一个极端都牵涉到重新吸纳人的自我,无论是凭借重新融合于普遍性的善,或是凭借主体朝着没有他者的客体绽放。

This narcissistic moment in the subject is to be found in all the genetic phases of the
individual, in all the degrees of human accomplishment in the person, in an earlier stage
in which it must assume a libidinal frustration and a later stage in which it is transcended
in a normative sublimation.

主体身上的自恋时刻能够被找到,在个人的基因的部分,在各种程度的个人的人类的成就里。在这些成就的早期阶段,主体必须承受生命力比多的挫折;在个人的人类成就的后期阶段,主体以规范性的升华,作为提升到神性。

This conception allows us to understand the aggressivity involved in the effects of all
regression, all arrested development, all rejection of typical development in the subject,
especially on the plane of sexual realization, and more specifically with each of the great
phases that the libidinal transformations determine in human life, the crucial function of
which has been demonstrated by analysis: weaning, the Oedipal stage, puberty, maturity,
or motherhood, even the climacteric.

这个观念让我们能够理解,侵凌性牵涉到各种的主体身上倒退的效应,各种被阻碍的发展,各种典型发展的被排斥。特别是在性的实现的层面,更加明确的是,在人类生活里,受到生命力比多的转换决定的每个重要的时期。精神分析曾经展示出这些时期的关键功能:断奶,伊狄浦斯的阶段,成熟,或成为母亲,甚至更年期。

And I have often said that the emphasis that was
placed at first in psychoanalytic theory on the aggressive turning round of the Oedipal
conflict upon the subject’s own self was due to the fact that the effects of the complex
were first perceived in failures to resolve it.

我经常说过,精神分析理论起初强调,伊狄浦斯跟主体的自己的自我的冲突,会产生侵凌性的翻转,那是由于这个事实:伊狄浦斯情结的影响首先被感知,因为没有办法化解伊狄浦斯。

There is no need to emphasize that a coherent theory of the narcissistic phase clarifies
the fact of the ambivalence proper to the ‘partial drives’ of scoptophilia, sadomasochism,
and homosexuality, as well as the stereotyped, ceremonial formalism of the aggressivity
that is manifested in them: we are dealing here with the often very little ‘realized’ aspect
of the apprehension of others in the practice of certain of these perversions, their
subjective value, in actual fact very different from that given to them in the existential
reconstructions, striking though they be, of a Sartre.

我们没有需要强调,自恋时期的一贯理论澄清爱恨交加的这个事实:爱恨交加是窥视狂,虐待与自虐,以及同性恋的「部份冲突」的本体,以及他们身上展现的侵凌性,具有典型化,仪式化的形式主义。我们在此正在谈论的是,对于这些的变态行为,别人经常会有罕为人体会的焦虑。实际上,他们的主体的价值,相当不同于在萨特的存在主义的重新建构里被给予他们的主体的价值,尽管它们令人嘱目。

I should also like to mention in passing that the decisive function that we attribute to
the imago of one’s own body in the determination of the narcissistic phase enables us to
understand the clinical relation between the congenital anomalies of functional
lateralization (left-handedness) and all forms of inversion of sexual and cultural
normalization. This reminds one of the role attributed to gymnastics in the ‘beautiful and
good’ ideal of education among the Ancient Greeks and leads us to the social thesis with
which I will conclude.
我也想顺便提到,当我们决定自恋时期时,我们归属于自己身体的「形象」的决定性功能,让我们能够理解这个临床的关系,处于左脑与右脑的功能的协调异常(左手癖),以及各式各样的性与文化正常化的倒错。这让我们回想到,古代希腊人们,将美育与品德教育的理想,归属于体育扮演的角色。并且引导我们来到我将作为结论的社会的命题。

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

无意识的形成 26

June 1, 2014

无意识的形成 26
雅克、拉康

37.11.57 1
Seminar 3: 20 november ,1957

We have approached our task then by way of the witticism, the
first example of which we began to analyse the last day, the one
that Freud made his own in the famillionaire joke, while at the
same time attributing it to Hirsch-Hyacinth, himself a very
significant poetic creation.

我们已经凭借机智语来从事我们的工作。其中第一个例子,我们前一日开始分析。那是弗洛依德自己创造的例子,也就是famillionaire的笑话。同时,他将它归功于Hirsch-Hyacinth,他自己则是重要的诗的创作。

It is not by chance that it is
against this background of poetic creation that Freud chose his
first example, and that we ourselves have found, as is usually
the case, that this original example turned out to be
particularly suitable to portray, to demonstrate, what we want to
demonstrate here.

弗洛依德选择他的第一个例子,以诗的创作作背景,这并非纯属偶然。通常在这种情况,我们自己会发现,这个原创的例子结果特别适合于描述,证明,我们在此想要证明的东西。

You have no doubt perceived that this brings us to the analysis
of the psychological phenomenon that is in question in the
witticism, at the level of a signifying articulation which, no
doubt, even though it may interest you, at least I hope a good
number of you, is nonetheless the object, as you can well
(2) imagine, of something that might easily appear disturbing. I
mean that without doubt this something that surprises, upsets
your way of thinking is also at the very core of the renewal of
the analytic experience that I am carrying on here with you, and
concerns the place, I would say up to a certain point the
existence, of the subject. Someone asked me about this, someone
who is certainly far from being badly informed, nor indeed badly
informed about the question itself, nor badly informed about what
I am trying to contribute to it.

无可置疑,你们已经感知,这让我们前来分析机智语受到质疑的心理的现象,处于能指化表达的层面。无可置疑,即使你们可能感到興趣,至少我希望你们有许多人感到興趣,能指化的表达仍然是这个客体,如同你们很有理由想像,某件很容易令人困扰的东西的客体。我的意思是,无可置疑,某件令人惊奇的东西,扰乱你们的思维方式,它也属于精神分析经验的更新的核心。我在此正在跟你们从事的精神分析经验的更新,跟这个地方息息相关。我不妨说,直到某个时刻,跟主体的存在息息相关。某个曾经询问我,关于某位知识颇为广博的人,关于这个问题的本身,他确实拥有不赖的知识,关于我正在尝试贡献给这个问题的东西,他确实拥有不赖的知识。

Someone asked me the question: “But what then becomes of the
subject? Where is it?”

某个人询问我这个问题;「主体因此发生什么事?它在哪里?」

The reply is easy when you are dealing with philosophers, because
it was a philosopher who asked me the question at the
Philosophical Society where I was speaking. I was tempted to
reply: “But on this point I could easily ask you to answer your
own question, and say that I leave it to philosophers to speak
about it. After all, I do not see why I should do all the work.”

当你们正在跟哲学家打交道时,这个回答很容易,因为是一位哲学家询问我这个问题,在我当时正在演讲的哲学学会。我忍不住地回答:「针对这一点,我可以容易地要求你回答你自己的问题,并且说,我将这个问题留给哲学家来谈论它。毕竟,我不明白为什么我竟然从事所有这个工作。」

This question of the elaboration of the notion of the subject
certainly needs to be revised as a result of the Freudian
experience. If there is something that has to be modified in it,
this is hardly a cause for surprise.

主体的观念的建构的问题,确实需要修正,由于弗洛依德的精神分析经验的结果。假如有某件东西必须在它里面被修正,这几乎没有什么好大惊小怪。

In other words, if Freud
has introduced something essential, should we still really expect
to see intelligent people, particularly psychoanalysts, all the
(3) more completely overwhelmed by a particular notion of the
subject, embodied in a certain style of thinking, as being simply
the ego – which is nothing but a return to what we can call the
grammatical confusions of the problem of the subject, the
identification of the ego with a power of synthesis that
certainly no data of experience can allow us to sustain. You
could even say that there is no need to draw on the Freudian
experience.

换句话说,假如弗洛依德已经介绍某件基本的东西,我们依旧会预期看见某些有识之士,特别是精神分析家,被主体的这个特殊的观念,更加搞得昏头转向。主体被用某种的思维方式具体表现,当著仅是这个自我。而自我仅是回到我们所谓的跟主体的难题的文法上的混淆。将自我认同是综合的力量。的确,无论再多的精神分析经验的资料,也无法让我们能够维持这样的综合的力量。你们甚至能够说,主体并不需要依靠弗洛依德的精神分析经验。

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