客体关系

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

Tags:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: