Archive for November, 2014

Aion VII

November 30, 2014

Aion VII
永恒纪元

Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格
VII
BACKGROUND TO THE PSYCHOLOGY OF
CHRISTIAN ALCHEMICAL SYMBOLISM

基督教炼金术象征主义的心理学的背景

267 “Mater Alchimia” could serve as the name of a whole epoch.
Beginning, roughly, with Christianity, it gave birth in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries to the age of science, only to
perish, unrecognized and misunderstood, and sink from sight in
the stream of the centuries as an age that had been outlived.

「炼金术物质」能够充当整个时代的名字。大约起源于基督教,炼金术物质在16与17世纪产生科学的时代,结果仅是毁灭,没有受到体认,而且被误解。然后沉落不见在几世纪的洪流里,作为已经被经历过的时代。

But, just as every mother was once a daughter, so too was alchemy.
It owes its real beginnings to the Gnostic systems, which Hippolytus
rightly regarded as philosophic, and which, with the
help of Greek philosophy and the mythologies of the Near and
Middle East, together with Christian dogmatics and Jewish
cabalism, made extremely interesting attempts, from the modern
point of view, to synthetize a unitary vision of the world in
which the physical and the mystical aspects played equal parts.

但是,正如每位母亲都曾经当过女儿,炼金术也是一样。它将它自己真实的开始归功于诺斯提的系统。海普利塔斯则是正确地将他视为哲学的系统。凭借希腊哲学与近东与远东的神话的帮助,以及基督教的教条与犹太教的基本教义派,诺斯提系统从事极端有趣的企图,从现代的观念,综合世界的一致性的幻象。在那里,生理与神秘的各个层面扮演相等的角色。

Had this attempt succeeded, we would not be witnessing today
the curious spectacle of two parallel world-views neither of
which knows, or wishes to know, anything about the other.
Hippolytus was in the enviable position of being able to see
Christian doctrine side by side with its pagan sisters, and similar
comparisons had also been attempted by Justin Martyr.

假如这个企图当时成功,我们今天将不会见证到这个耐人寻味的景象,两个并列的世界观的景象。其中没有一个世界观知道,或希望知道关于另外一个世界观的任何事情。海普利塔斯所处的立场让人羡慕,因为他能够看见基督教的信条,跟它的异教徒的姐妹们相提并论。贾斯丁 马泰尔也曾经企图做这些的比较。

To the honour of Christian thinking it must be said that up till the
time of Kepler there was no lack of praiseworthy attempts to
interpret and understand Nature, in the broadest sense, on the
basis of Christian dogma.

为了尊崇基督教的思想,我们必须说:一直到凯卜勒的时代,以基督教的教条作为基础,想要以广义的意义,解释与理解自然的令人赞赏的企图络绎不绝。

268 These attempts, however, inevitably came to grief for lack
of any adequate knowledge of natural processes. Thus, in the
course of the eighteenth century, there arose that notorious rift
between faith and knowledge.

可是,这些企图无可避免地遭遇挫折,因为欠缺对于自然过程的充分的知识。因此,在18世界的过程,信仰与知识就产生恶名昭著的分裂。

Faith lacked experience and science
missed out the soul. Instead, science believed fervently in
absolute objectivity and assiduously overlooked the fundamental
difficulty that the real vehicle and begetter of all knowledge is
the psyche, the very thing that scientists knew the least about
for the longest time.

信仰欠缺经验,而科学则是失落灵魂。代替地,科学热烈地相信绝对的客观性,并且不知不觉地忽视这个基本的困难:一切知识的真实的工具与产生者是心灵。长久以来,心灵就是科学家最为罕知的东西。

It was regarded as a symptom of chemical
reactions, an epiphenomenon of biological processes in the
brain-cells—indeed, for some time it did not exist at all. Yet all
the while scientists remained totally unaware of the fact that
they were using for their observations a photographic apparatus
of whose nature and structure they knew practically nothing,
and whose very existence many of them were unwilling to admit.

心灵被认为是化学反应的征状,是脑细胞的生物过程的次级现象。的确,有段时间,心灵根本就不存在。可是,科学家始终完全不知道这个事实:他们正在使用一个摄影的仪器,作为他们的观察。而这个摄影仪器的特性与结构,他们几乎一无所知。很多科学家不愿意承认心灵的存在。

It is only quite recently that they have been obliged to take into
their calculations the objective reality of this psychic factor. Significantly
enough, it is microphysics that has come up against
the psyche in the most tangible and unexpected way. Obviously,
we must disregard the psychology of the unconscious in this connection,
since its working hypothesis consists precisely in the
reality of the psyche. What is significant here is the exact opposite,
namely the psyche’s collision with physics. 1

仅有在最近,科学家才被迫将这个心灵的因素的客观的现实,列入他们的考量。非常重要地,微分物理学以非常具体而意外的方式遭遇到心灵。显而易见地,我们必须忽略关于这点的无意识的心理学。因为它的运作的假设确实就是在于心灵的现实。在此,重要的事情是这个确实的相反,也就是,心灵跟物理的冲突。

269 Now for the Gnostics—and this is their real secret—the
psyche existed as a source of knowledge just as much as it did for
the alchemists. Aside from the psychology of the unconscious,
contemporary science and philosophy know only of what is outside,
while faith knows only of the inside, and then only in the
Christian form imparted to it by the passage of the centuries,
beginning with St. Paul and the gospel of St. John. Faith, quite
as much as science with its traditional objectivity, is absolute,
which is why faith and knowledge can no more agree than
Christians can with one another.

现在,对于诺斯提教派,这是他们的秘密—心灵存在,作为知识的来源。正如它存在,对于炼金术师。除了无意识的心理学外,当代科学与哲学仅是知道外在的东西,而信仰则仅是知道内在的东西。因此仅有以几世纪的经过赐予它的基督教的形态,从圣保罗与圣约翰福音书开始。信仰与科学一样,都具有它的传统的客观性,它是绝对的。那就是为什么信仰与知识不再互相同意,如同基督教徒与它无法互相同意。

27° Our Christian doctrine is a highly differentiated symbol that
expresses the transcendent psychic—the God-image and its properties,
to speak with Dorn. The Creed is a “symbolum.”

我们的基督教的教条是一个高度差异化的象征,表达超验的心灵—上帝的意象与上帝的属性。用敦恩的话说,这个信念是一种「象征主义」。

This comprises practically everything of importance that can be ascertained
about the manifestations of the psyche in the field of
inner experience, but it does not include Nature, at least not in
any recognizable form.

这几乎包括每样重要的东西。它们能够被确定,关于心灵的证明,在内在经验的领域。但是它并没有包括自然,至少不是以可被体认的形式。

Consequently, at every period of Christianity
there have been subsidiary currents or undercurrents
that have sought to investigate the empirical aspect of Nature
not only from the outside but also from the inside.

结果,在基督教的每个时期,总是有些支流或暗流曾经尝试探索自然的经验的层面,不但从外在,而且从内在。

27 1 Although dogma, like mythology in general, expresses the
quintessence of inner experience and thus formulates the operative
principles of the objective psyche, i.e., the collective uncon-
scious, it does so by making use of a language and outlook that
have become alien to our present way of thinking.

虽然信条,就像一般的神话,表达内在经验的本质,因此阐明客观的心灵的运作的原理,也就是,集体无意识。可是,它这样做,是凭借使用语言与外观。那是我们目前的思维方式感到陌生的语言与外观。

The word “dogma” has even acquired a somewhat unpleasant sound and
frequently serves merely to emphasize the rigidity of a prejudice.
For most people living in the West, it has lost its meaning as a
symbol for a virtually unknowable and yet “actual”—i.e., operative—
fact.

「教条」这个字词甚至已经获得相当令人不愉快的声音,并且经常充当仅是强调偏见的僵化。对于生活于西方的大部分的人们,教条这个字词已经丧失它作为象征的意义,象征几乎无法知道可是又「实际」,也就是,运作的事实。

Even in theological circles any real discussion of
dogma had as good as ceased until the recent papal declarations,
a sign that the symbol has begun to fade, if it is not already
withered.

即使在神学的圈子里,任何真正的讨论信条几乎都停止,直到最近的教皇的宣告。这是象征已经开始衰微的迹象,即使它还没有已经枯萎。

This is a dangerous development for our psychic
health, as we know of no other symbol that better expresses the
world of the unconscious. More and more people then begin
looking round for exotic ideas in the hope of finding a substitute,
for example in India.

对于我们的心灵的健康,这是一个危险的发展。因为我们并不知道有任何其他的象征,更加贴切地表达无意识的世界。越来越多的人们因此开始环首四顾,寻找外来的观念,希望找到一个替代品,譬如,在印度。

This hope is delusory, for though
the Indian symbols formulate the unconscious just as well as
the Christian ones do, they each exemplify their own spiritual
past. The Indian teachings constitute the essence of several
thousand years of experience of Indian life.

这个希望是欺骗性。因为虽然印度的象征阐释无意识,跟基督教的象征阐释一样详尽,他们各自作为他们自己的精神的过往的典范。印度的教导形成好几千年的印度的生活的经验的本质。

Though we can
learn a lot from Indian thought, it can never express the past
that is stored up within us. The premise we start from is and
remains Christianity, which covers anything from eleven to nineteen
centuries of Western life. Before that, there was for most
Western peoples a considerably longer period of polytheism and
polydemonism.

虽然我们能够从印度的思想学习,它永远无法表达被储存在我们内在的过去。我们用来开始的假设是基督教,也始终是基督教。基督教涵盖从11世纪到19世纪的西方的生活的一切。在那之前,对于大部分的西方的民族,有更加漫长的时期,是多神教与多重恶魔教。

In certain parts of Europe Christianity goes back
not much more than five hundred years—a mere sixteen generations.
The last witch was burnt in Europe the year my grandfather
was born, and barbarism with its degradation of human
nature has broken out again in the twentieth century.

在欧洲的某些部分,基督教回溯不到五百年前—那仅是16个世代。就在我的祖父诞生那年,欧洲最后的女巫被烧死。野蛮主义跟它的人性的堕落在20世纪再次爆发。

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

个人梦的象征 8

November 30, 2014

个人梦的象征 8

Individual Dream Symbolism in Relation to Alchemy : 359
个人的梦的象征跟炼金术的关系

CarlJung
卡尔 荣格

3. The Symbolism of the Mandala
三、曼陀罗的象征

14. Dream:
第十四个梦

The dreamer goes into a chemist’s shop with his father.
Valuable things can be got there quite cheap, above all a
special water. His father tells him about the country the
water comes from. Afterwards he crosses the Rubicon by
train.

作梦者跟他的父亲进入药剂师的店。在那里,各种有价值的东西能够很便宜地被买到。尤其是一种特别的水。他的父亲告诉他关于这种水来自的国家。后来,他搭乘火车,旅越过鲁比康河。

The traditional apothecary’s shop, with its carboys and
gallipots, its waters, its lapis divinus and infemalis and its
magisteries, is the last visible remnant of the kitchen paraphernalia
of those alchemists who saw in the donum spiritus
sancti—the precious gift—nothing beyond the chimera of
goldmaking.

传统的药剂师的店,有盐酸,盆子,蒸馏水,铜钒,与吸血剂与它的魔法剂,是那些炼金术的厨房设备的最后可见的残余。那些炼金术师看见这个珍贵的礼物,那就是制造黄金的喷火怪物。

The ”special water” is literally the aqua nostra
non vulgi. bi It is easy to understand why it is his father
who leads the dreamer to the source of life, since he is
the natural source of the latter’s life. We could say that
the father represents the country or soil from which that
life sprang.

这个「特别的水」实质上是生命的水。我们很容易理解为什么他的父亲引导作梦者来的生命的来源。因为他是后者的生命的自然的来源。我们能够说,父亲代表生命起源的国家或泥土。

But figuratively speaking, he is the “informing
spirit” who initiates the dreamer into the meaning of life
and explains its secrets according to the teachings of old.
He is a transmitter of the traditional wisdom. But now,
the fatherly pedagogue fulfils this function only in the
dreams of his son, where he appears as the archetypal
father figure, the “wise old man.”

但是,比喻地说,他是这位「告知的精神」。他启发作梦者进入生命的意义,并且解释它的秘密,依照古老的教导。他是传统的智慧的传递者。但是,现在,这种父亲的教诲实践这个功能,仅有在他儿子的梦里。在那里,他出现,作为原型的父亲的人物,「智慧老人」。

The water of life is easily had: everybody possesses it,
though without knowing its value. “Spernitur a stultis”—it
is despised by the stupid, because they assume that every
good thing is always outside and somewhere else, and that
the source in their own souls is a “nothing but.”

生命之水很容易得到:每个人都拥有它,虽然并不知道它的价值。它受到愚蠢者的轻视,因为他们认为:每个好东西总是在外面与某个其他地方。在他们自己的灵魂的来源就是一个「仅仅」。

Like the lapis, it is “pretio quoque vilis,” of little price, and therefore,
like the jewel in Spitteler’s Prometheus, it is rejected
by everyone from the high priest and the academicians
down to the very peasants, and “in viam eiectus,” flung out
into the street, where Ahasucrus picks it up and puts it
into his pocket. The treasure has sunk down again into the
unconscious.

就像石头,它是没有多大价值的,因此就像史匹特勒的普罗米修斯的珠宝,它被每个人拒绝,从高阶僧侣与学院人士,一直到农夫。这个无用之物被抛出到街上。在那里,哈萨鲁斯将它拾起,放假他的口袋。这个财宝再次沉落到无意识。

But the dreamer has noticed something and with vigorous
determination crosses the Rubicon. He has realized that
the flux and fire of life are not to be underrated and are
absolutely necessary for the achievement of wholeness. But
there is no recrossing the Rubicon.

但是作梦者注意到某件事情,并且以坚定决心跨越鲁宾康河。他已经体会到,生命的流动与火不应该被低估,它们是绝对需要的,对于完整性的完成。但是重新跨越鲁宾康河是不可能的。

15. Dream:
第15个梦

Four people are going down a river: the dreamer, his
father, a certain friend, and the unknown woman.
In so far as the “friend” is a definite person well known
to the dreamer, he belongs, like the father, to the conscious
world of the ego. Hence something very important has
happened: in dream 11 the unconscious was three against
one, but now the situation is reversed and it is the dreamer
who is three against one (the latter being the unknown
woman).

四个人们正在进入水中:作梦者,他的父亲,某个朋友,与这位陌生女子。对于作梦者,这位「朋友」是他熟稔的明确的人,就像他的父亲,他属于自我的意识的世界。因此,某件非常重要的东西已经发生:在梦里,无意识是三位对抗一位。但是现在,这个情况被逆转。作梦者是三位对抗一位(后者就是这位陌生女子)。

The unconscious has been depotentiated. The
reason for this is that by “taking the plunge” the dreamer
has connected the upper and the lower regions—that is to
say, he has decided not to live only as a bodiless abstract
being but to accept the body and the world of instinct,
the reality of the problems posed by love and life, and to
act accordingly. *~> This was the Rubicon that was crossed.
Individuation, becoming a self, is not only a spiritual
problem, it is the problem of all life.

无意识已经被除掉生命力。这样的理由是, 凭借「孤注一掷」,作梦者已经连接上边与下边的地区。也就是说,他已经决定不要仅是生活,作为没有身体的抽象的存在。而是要接受身体与本能的世界,爱与生命提出的难题的现实,然后依照这个而行动。这就是被跨越过的鲁宾河。个体化成为自性,不但是精神的难题,它也是所有的生命的难题。

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

Identification 48

November 30, 2014

Identification 48
认同

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

24.1.62 IX 5

It is in the very syncopes of this ceaselessly turning
articulation of the play of language that we have to locate the
(8) subject in its diverse functions. My illustrations are never
a bad way of adapting a mental eye in which the imaginary plays a
great part. It is for this reason that, even if it is a detour,
I do not think its a bad thing to rapidly sketch out for you a
little remark simply because I find it at this point in my notes.

就在语言的运作的不停旋转的表达的昏迷当中,我们必须找出主体的位置,与其多样性的功能。我的说明採用灵视的宏观,效果确实不错。在这个灵视的宏观里,想像界扮演重要的部分。因为这个理由,即使这是个迂迴,我并不认为这是坏事,快速地跟你们描绘出一段简短评论,仅是因为这个时刻,我在我的注释里找到它。

I have spoken to you more than once, in connection with the
signifier, about the Chinese character, and I am very keen to
dispel for you the idea that its original is an imitative figure.

我曾经不仅一次跟你们谈论过关于这个能指,关于中文的这个字。我非常渴望跟你们驱除这个观念:它的原版是一个模拟的人物。

There is an example of it which I only took because it is the one
which was of most use to me, I took the first of those which are
articulated in these examples, these archaic forms in the work of
Karlgren which is called Grammata Serica, which means exactly
“Chinese signifiers”.

有一个例子,我仅是採用它,因为它对我的用途非常大。我採用在这些例子里被表达的第一个例子。那些过时的形式,在卡格林的著作里,被称为是Grammata Serica。它的意思是「中文的能指」。

The first one that he makes use of in its modern form is the
it is the character Kho which means power. In
the Tch ouen which is an erudite work, precious for us both
because its relatively ancient character and the fact that it is
already very erudite, that is to say well furnished with
interpretations which we may have to come back to. It seems that
we would have good reason to trust the root that the commentator
gives of it which is a very nice one, namely that it is a
question of a schématisation of the shock of the column of
air which it has just expelled in the guttural
occlusive against the obstacle which the back of the
tongue against the palate opposes to it.

他使用的第一个字,在它的现代的形式是,就是「可」这个字,意思是「权力」。在「春秋左传」,这是一部渊博的著作,对我们非常珍贵。因为它比较古代的文字。它已经是非常渊博的这个事实。换句话说,它充分具有这些诠释,我们可以回头探讨它。似乎,我们有充分理由信任这个字根,评注者给予它的字根。这是一个很好的字根,也就是,它是它刚刚驱除的那阵气流的震撼的基模的问题,以喉咙的停顿声音,对抗这个阻碍,舌头的背部对着跟它相对的上嘴唇。

This is all following, the more seductive in that, if you open a book on phonetics, you (9) will find an image which is more or less that in order to
express for you the functioning of the occlusive:

这是更加流畅,更加诱拐,因为假如你们打开一本语音学的书,你们将发现一个差不多是那样的意象,为了跟你们表达这个停顿音的意义:

And you must admit that it is not a bad thing that it should be
that which was chosen in order to depict the word to see the
possibility, the axial function introduced into the world by the
advent of the subject right in the middle of the real.

你们必须承认,这并不是坏事,它竟然是被选择的东西,为了描述这个字词,为了看出这个可能性。就在真实界的中央,由于主体的来临所介绍进入这个世界的轴心的功能。

The ambiguity is complete. For a very great number of words are
articulated as kho in Chinese, in which this would act for us as
a phonetic, except for the fact that the complete outfit (les
completes) presentifying the subject with its signifying
framework, and this without any ambiguity and in all the
characters, is the representation of the mouth:

这个模糊暧昧是完整的。因为有许多的字词被表达,作为中文的「可」。用这个字,这将替代我们行为,作为一个语音。除了这个事实:让主体成为具体化身的完整的服装,具有它的能指意义的架构。这确实有点模糊暧昧,在所有的字里,「可」这个字是嘴巴的代表:

Put this sign on top, it is the sign Ka which means
big. It has obviously some relationship with the small human
form, generally deprived of arms. Here, since it is a big person
that is in question, there are arms. This has nothing to do with
what happens when you have added this sign ta to the preceding
signifier.

若是将这个符号放在顶端,那就是「大」。显而易见,它跟通常被剥掉手臂的人形的「小」有点关系。因此,因为这是受到质疑的大的人,他有手臂。这跟你将这个符号增加到前述的能指,所发生的事情,根本没有关系。

Henceforth this is read as i, but this preserves the
trace of an ancient pronunciation of which we have attestations
thanks to the usage of this term in rhymes in the ancient poems,
specifically those of Che King who is one of the most
extraordinary examples of literary misadventure because destiny
made him become the support of all sorts of moralising
lucubrations, to be the foundation of a whole very twisted
teaching of the mandarins on the duties of the sovereign, of the
(10) people and of everybody and anybody, even though what we
have are obviously love songs which have a peasant origin.

因此,这被阅读为 i, 但是这保留我们曾经测试过的古代发音的痕迹。由于这个术语在古代诗里的韵律的用途。明确地说,就是「Che King诗经」的那些诗。他是文学的错误冒险的特殊例子。因为命运让他成为各种的道德化的润色,成为中文普通话的扭曲教学的基础,在统治的责任里,在人们,每个人,任何人的责任。即使我们所拥有的东西,显而易见地,是起于农夫的情歌。

A little experience of Chinese literature – I am not trying to make
you believe that mine is very great, I am not confusing myself
with …………. who, when he makes an allusion to his
experience of China, gives us a paragraph that you can find in
the books of Pere Wieger which are available to everybody.
In any case, others besides myself have lit up this path
specifically Marcel Granet, whose beautiful book on the dances
and legends and the ancient feasts of China you will lose nothing
by opening.

中文文学的一个小经验—我并不尝试让你们相信:我的经验是伟大的。我并没有将我自己混淆跟、、、当他提到他在中国的经验时,他给我一个段落,你们在皮尔 伟基的书里能够找到,那些书,每个人很容易得到。无论如何,除了我自己外,还有其他人们曾经启明这个途径。明确地说,就是马赛尔 格兰尼,他探讨跳舞与传说,以及中国的古代的庆宴的的美丽的书,你们不妨去读看看。

With a little effort you will be able to familiarise
yourself with this really extraordinary dimension which appears
of what one can do with something which reposes on the most
elementary forms of signifying articulation. By chance, in this
tongue, words are monosyllabic: they are superb, invariable,
cubic, you cannot make a mistake in them.

假如稍微努力一下,你们将会能够熟稔这个确实特殊的维度。这个维度出现,我们能够处理某件依靠能指的表达的最基本的形式的东西。偶然地,在这个语言,文字是单音节。它们很优秀,一成不变,立方体,你们用它们,不会搞错。

They are identified to
the signifier it has to be said. You have groups of four verses,
each one composed of four syllables, the situation is simple. If
you see them and think that from that one can extract everything
even a metaphysical doctrine which has no relationship with the
original signification, it will begin, for those who have not got
there yet to open your spirit. That is nevertheless the way it
is: for centuries the teaching of morality and of politics was
carried out on the basis of jingles which signify on the whole “I
would really like to have sex with you”, I am not exaggerating at
all, go and see.

它们被辨认给它必须被说的这个能指。假如你们有四句诗的团体,每一句由四个音节组成,这个情况是单纯的。假如你们看见它们,然后认为,从那个情况开始,你们能够抽取每样东西,即使是隐喻的信条,它更原初的意义,根本没有关系。它将会开始,对于那些还没有开启你们精神的人们。可是,这是它存在的样子。几世纪来,道德与政治的教导被实行,根据诗歌的基础。大体上,它意味着:「我确实想要跟你做爱。」我根本没有夸张。你们前去瞧瞧。

雄伯译

Aion 170

November 29, 2014

Aion 170

永恒纪元

Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格

XI
第六章

THE ALCHEMICAL INTERPRETATION
OF THE FISH

鱼的炼金术解释

263 We see here how Dorn gets round his paradox: no one can
produce anything without an object that is like him. But it is
like him because it comes from the same source. If he wants to
produce the incorrupt medicament, he can only do so in something
that is akin to his own centre, and this is the centre in the
earth and in all creatures. It comes, like his own, from the same
fountainhead, which is God.

我们在此看见敦恩如何克服他的悖离:假如没有类似他的客体,没有人能够产生任何东西。但是这个东西类似他,因为它来自相同的来源。假如他想要产生这个不腐败的药剂,他仅能在某件类似他自己的中心的东西上面做。这就是地球与所有生物的中心。它前来,从相同的泉源,那就是上帝,就像他自己的泉源。

Separation into apparently dissimilar
things, such as heaven, the elements, man, etc., was necessary
only for the work of generation. Everything separated must
be united again in the production of the stone, so that the original
state of unity shall be restored.

仅是为了产生的工作,分离成为明显不同的东西,譬如,天上,元素,人,等等,才是必要的。每样被分离的东西必须被再次统一,在石头的产生。所以,统一的原初的状态应该被恢复。

But, says Dorn, “thou wilt
never make from others the One which thou seekest, except first
there be made one thing of thyself. . . . For so is the will of
God, that the pious shall pursue the pious work which they seek,
and the perfect shall perfect the other on which they were intent.
. . . See therefore that thou goest forth such as thou desirest
the work to be which thou seekest.” 58

但是,敦恩说:「你将永远无法用别人来形成你追寻的这个一,除了首先存在属于你自己的一件东西。因为上帝的意志也是一样,虔诚的人应该追寻他们追寻的工作,完美的人应该使他们意图的他者成为完美。因此,请你们负责:你们应该前往你们欲望工作成为你们寻求的样子。

264 The union of opposites in the stone is possible only when the
adept has become One himself. The unity of the stone is the
equivalent of individuation, by which man is made one; we
would say that the stone is a projection of the unified self. This
formulation is psychologically correct. It does not, however,
take sufficient account of the fact that the stone is a transcendent
unity.

在石头的对立的统一,仅有当通灵者他自己已经成为一,才有可能。石头的统一是个体化的相等语。凭借这个个体化,人才成为一。我们过去常说:石头上是被统一的自性的投射。这个阐述在心理学而言是正确的。可是,它并没有充分描述这个事实:石头是超验的统一体。

We must therefore emphasize that though the self can
become a symbolic content of consciousness, it is, as a supraordinate
totality, necessarily transcendental as well.

因此,我们必须强调,虽然自性能够成为意识的象征的内容,作为早先定制的完整性,它必然也是超验的。

Dorn recognized
the identity of the stone with the transformed man when
he exclaimed: “Transmute yourselves from dead stones into
living philosophical stones!” 59 But he lacked the concept of an
unconscious existence which would have enabled him to express
the identity of the subjective psychic centre and the objective
alchemical centre in a satisfactory formula.

敦恩体认出石头的认同于被转化的人,当他宣称:「将你们自己从死去的石头,转化成为活生生的哲学的石头!」但是他欠缺无意识的生命实存的观念。这个无意识的生命实存本来可以让他能够表达主体的心灵的中心的认同,以及客体的炼金术的中心,以一个令人满意的公式。

Nevertheless, he
succeeded in explaining the magnetic attraction between the
imagined symbol—the “theoria”—and the “centre” hidden in
matter, or in the interior of the earth or in the North Pole, as
the identity of two extremes. That is why the theoria and the
arcanum in matter are both called Veritas. This truth “shines”
in us, but it is not of us: it “is to be sought not in us, but in the
image of God which is in us.” 60

可是,他成功地解释磁性的吸引力,在被想像的象征—隐藏在物质里的「冥思」与「中心」,或是在地球的内部,或是在北极,作为是两个极端的认同。那就是为什么物质里的冥思与奥秘,两者都称为是「真理」。这个真理在我们身上「闪亮」,但是真理并不属于我们:真理应该被寻求,不是在我们身上,而是在我们身上的上帝的意象。)

265 Dorn thus equates the transcendent centre in man with the
God-image. This identification makes it clear why the alchemical
symbols for wholeness apply as much to the arcanum in man as
to the Deity, and why substances like mercury and sulphur, or
the elements fire and water, could refer to God, Christ, and the
Holy Ghost.

敦恩因此将人身上的超验的中心,等同是上帝的意象。这种认同清楚表明为什么炼金术的完整性的象征,同样应用到人身上的奥秘,如同运用到神性。以及为什么像水银与硫的物质,或是火与水的元素,会是提到上帝,基督,与圣魂。

Indeed, Dorn goes even further and allows the
predicate of being to this truth, and to this truth alone: “Further,
that we may give a satisfactory definition of the truth, we
say it is, but nothing can be added to it; for what, pray, can be
added to the One, what is lacking to it, or on what can it be supported?
For in truth nothing exists beside that One.” 61 The
only thing that truly exists for him is the transcendental self,
which is identical with God.

的确,敦恩甚至更加深入探寻,承认生命实存对于这个真理的述词,仅是针对这个真理:「更加深入地,我们可以给予真理一个令人满意的定义。我们说,真理具有生命实存,但是没有任何东西能够被增加到它那里。因为,想想看,什么东西能够被增加给这个一?对于这个一,还欠缺什么?或这个一能够以什么作为支撑?因为事实上,没有任何其他东西存在,除了那个一。」对于这个一的他,唯一确实存在的东西,是超验的自性。这个超验的自性认同于上帝。

266 Dorn was probably the first alchemist to sum up the results
of all the symbolical terms and to state clearly what had been
the impelling motive of alchemy from the very beginning. It is
remarkable that this thinker, who is far more lucid in his formulations
than his successor Jakob Bohme, has remained completely
unknown to historians of philosophy until today.

敦恩很可能是总结所有炼金术术语的这些结果的第一位炼金术师。他清楚地陈述从一开始作为炼金术的驱动的动机的东西。引人注意的是,这位思想家,他的阐释比起他的前辈杰寇 博梅,更加清楚。哲学的历史家直到今天,才完整地认识他。

He thus shares the fate of Hermetic philosophy in general, which,
for those unacquainted with modern psychology, remains a
closed book sealed with seven seals. But this book has to be
opened sometime if we wish to understand the mentality of the
present day; for alchemy is the mother of the essential substance
as well as the concreteness of modern scientific thinking, and not
scholasticism, which was responsible in the main only for the
discipline and training o£ the intellect.

他因此分享一般的赫尔墨斯主义的哲学这个命运。对于并不熟稔现代哲学的人们,赫尔墨斯主义的哲学,始终是一部封闭的书,用七个封印封著。但是这部书有时必须被打开,假如我们想要理解目前这个时代的心灵。因为炼金术师基本物质之母,以及现代的科学思想的具体表现。而不是经院哲学。因为经院哲学主要仅是负责知识的纪律与训练。

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

Aion 168

November 29, 2014

Aion 168

永恒纪元

Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格

XI
第六章

THE ALCHEMICAL INTERPRETATION
OF THE FISH

鱼的炼金术解释

258 The treatise of Rosinus contains a parallel to Morienus: 5S
“This stone is something which is fixed more in thee [than elsewhere],
created of God, and thou art its ore, and it is extracted
from thee, and wheresoever thou art it remains inseparably with
thee. . . .

罗西那思的论文包括跟摩瑞那思的并列:这个石头上某件更加固定在你身上的东西,胜过于其他地方。它由上帝所创造。你就是它的矿源,它从你身上抽取出来。而且,无论你在哪里,它始终跟你不分开。

And as man is made up of four elements, so also is
the stone, and so it is [dug] out of man, and thou art its ore,
namely by working; and from thee it is extracted, that is by division;
and in thee it remains inseparably, namely by knowledge.

正如人是由四个元素组成,石头也是由四个元素组成。它从人身上挖掘出来。你就是它的矿源。也就是说,凭借工作。从你身上,它被抽取出来。也就是被区分。在你身上,它始终不分开,也就是,根据知识。

[To express it] otherwise, fixed in thee: namely in the Mercurius
of the wise; thou art its ore: that is, it is enclosed in thee and
thou holdest it secretly; and from thee it is extracted when it
is reduced [to its essence] by thee and dissolved; for without thee
it cannot be fulfilled, and without it canst thou not live, and so
the end looks to the beginning, and contrariwise/’ 55

(为了用不同方式表达它,它被固定在你身上:换句话说,在智慧者的墨丘利神。你是它的矿源。也就是说,它被封闭在你身上,你秘密地拥有它。从你身上,它被抽取出来,当它被你简化到成为它的本质,然后被溶解。因为假如没有你,它无法被充实。假如没有它,你无法生活著。所以,结局是朝向开始,逆时钟方向。」

259 This looks like a commentary on Morienus. We learn from
it that the stone is implanted in man by God, that the laborant
is its prima materia, that the extraction corresponds to the socalled
divisio or separatio of the alchemical procedure, and that
through his knowledge of the stone man remains inseparably
bound to the self. The procedure here described could easily be
understood as the realization of an unconscious content.

这看起来像是对于摩瑞纳斯的注释。我们从它学习到:石头被上帝安置在人身上。化学家就是它的原初的物质。抽取物对应于恋金术过程的所谓的「分离」。通过他对于石头的认识,人始终无法分离地跟自性连接一块。在此被描述的这个程序很容易被理解作为无意识内容的体现。

Fixation in the Mercurius of the wise would then correspond to the
traditional Hermetic knowledge, since Mercurius symbolizes
the Nous; 56 through this knowledge the self, as a content of the
unconscious, is made conscious and “fixed” in the mind. For
without the existence of conscious concepts apperception is, as
wc know, impossible.

在智慧者的墨丘利神的固定因此将对应于传统的赫尔墨斯主义的知识。因为墨丘利神象征知识。通过这个知识,自性,作为无意识的内容,成为意识并且「固著」于心灵。因为假如没有意识观念的的存在,据我们所知,统觉是不可能的。

This explains numerous neurotic disturbances
which arise from the fact that certain contents are
constellated in the unconscious but cannot be assimilated owing
to the lack of apperceptive concepts that would “grasp” them.

这解释为什么有那么多的神经症的困扰,它们起源于这个事实:某些的内容被汇集于无意识,但是无法被吸收,由于欠缺将可以「理解」它们的统觉的观念。

That is why it is so extremely important to tell children fairytales
and legends, and to inculcate religious ideas (dogmas) into
grown-ups, because these things are instrumental symbols with
whose help unconscious contents can be canalized into consciousness,
interpreted, and integrated. Failing this, their energy
flows off into conscious contents which, normally, are not much
emphasized, and intensifies them to pathological proportions.

那就是为什么这是如此极端重要,要跟小孩说童话故事与传说,并且灌输宗教的观念(信条),一直到成年人。因为这些事情是有帮助的象征,藉由它们的帮助,无意识的内容能够被引导到意识,被解释与被融合。假如没有这样做,它们的能源将会流露进入意识的内容。正常来说,意识的内容并没有经常被强调,并且增强它们,到病态的程度。

We then get apparently groundless phobias and obsessionscrazes,
idiosyncrasies, hypochondriac ideas, and intellectual perversions
suitably camouflaged in social, religious, or political
garb.

我们因此拥有明星没有来由的恐惧与著魔,怪癖,忧郁症的观念,与知识的变态。它们恰如其分地被描绘轮廓,在社会,宗教,或政治的外表里。

260 The old master saw the alchemical opus as a kind of apocatastasis,
the restoring of an initial state in an “eschatological”
one (“the end looks to the beginning, and contrariwise”). This
is exactly what happens in the individuation process, whether it
take the form of a Christian transformation (“Except ye become
as little children”), or a satori experience in Zen (“show me
your original face”), or a psychological process of development
in which the original propensity to wholeness becomes a conscious
happening.

年长的导师看待这个炼金术的工作,作为是一种的「重建」,原初状态的恢复,处于「末世论」的状态。(结局朝向开始,然后逆时钟方向)。这确实就是个体化过程发生的事情,无论它採取基督教转化的形态(除非你成为小孩),或是发展的心理的过程。在那个过程,完整的原初的习性成为意识的事件。

261 For the alchemist it was clear that the “centre,” or what we
would call the self, does not lie in the ego but is outside it, “in
us” yet not “in our mind,” being located rather in that which we
unconsciously are, the “quid” which we still have to recognize.

对于炼金术师,显而易见,这个「中心」,或我们所谓的自性,并不是在于这个自我,而是在自我的外面,在「我们里面」,可是不是「在我们的心里」。相反地,它被找出位置,在我们无意识所在地地方,我们依旧必须体认的「魔性」。

Today we would call it the unconscious, and we distinguish between
a personal unconscious which enables us to recognize the
shadow and an impersonal unconscious which enables us to
recognize the archetypal symbol of the self. Such a point of view
was inaccessible to the alchemist, and having no idea of the
theory of knowledge, he had to exteriorize his archetype in the
traditional way and lodge it in matter, even though he felt, as
Dorn and others undoubtedly did, that the centre was paradoxically
in man and yet at the same time outside him.

今天我们将称它为无意识。我们区别个人的无意识与非个人的无意识;前者让我们能够体认出阴影,后者让我们能够体认出自性的原型象征。这样的观点并无法让炼金术师接纳。由于并不知道知识的理论,炼金术师必须用传统的方式,将他的原型外在化,并且将它定位在物质。即使他感觉到,如同敦恩与其他炼金术师感觉到,中心悖论地在人身上,可是同时又在他的身外。

109262 The “incorrupt medicament,” the lapis, says Dorn, can be
found nowhere save in heaven, for heaven “pervades all the elements
with invisible rays meeting together from all parts at the
centre of the earth, and generates and hatches forth all creatures.”
“No man can generate in himself, but [only] in that
which is like him, which is from the same [heaven].” 57

敦恩说,这个「不腐败的灵药」,这个石头仅有在天堂能够被找到,因为天堂「以隐形的光弥漫所有的元素,这些隐形的光从地球的中心的各个部分汇合一块。天堂产生与孵生所有的生物。」「没有能够在他自己身上产生,仅有在类似他的人身上产生。那是来自相同的天堂。」

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

塞尚的疑惑

November 28, 2014

〈塞尚的疑惑〉

梅洛龐蒂(Maurice Merleau-Ponty) 著
龔 卓 軍 譯

Cézanne’s Doubt
It took him one hundred working sessions for a still life, one hundred fifty
sittings for a portrait.

為了一幅靜物,他需要百次的工作投入;為了一幅肖像,他可以五百度去描摹那靜坐的人。

雄伯
One hundred fifty sittings 一百五十次的坐画姿态

What we call his work was, for him, only the attempt and the approach of his painting.

我們眼中所見的他的作品,對他而言不過是一而再、再而三的嘗試,試圖掌握繪畫。

In September of 1906, at the age of sixty seven—
one month before his death—he wrote: “I was in such a state of mental agitation, in such great confusion that for a time I feared my weak reason would not survive. . . . Now it seems I am better and that I see more
clearly the direction my studies are taking. Will I ever arrive at the goal, so
intensely sought and so long pursued? I am still working from nature, and
it seems to me I am making slow progress.”

一九○六年九月,正值他死前一個月,這位六十七歲的老人寫道:「我的內心騷亂躁動不已,有時候,我恐怕自己虛弱的理智已沒辦法維持下去了……現在,情形似乎好轉了,而我也對自己的研究方向摸得更清楚。但擺在眼前的,仍是那麼需要嘔心瀝血的探索歷程,我究竟能不能達成目標呢?我仍孜孜不倦地向自然學習,然而卻自覺進步甚緩。」

Painting was his world and his
mode of existence.

繪畫乃是他的世界、他的生活方式。

He worked alone, without students, without admiration
from his family, without encouragement from the critics.

他孤獨地畫著,沒有學生追隨,沒有家人的讚美,也沒有畫評家的鼓勵。

He painted on the afternoon of the day his mother died. In 1870 he was painting at
L’Estaque while the police were after him for dodging the draft. And still
he had moments of doubt about this vocation.

母親逝世的當天下午,他在畫畫。一八七○年,列斯塔克(l’Estaque) 地方警方以逃避兵役罪名緝捕他時,他也在畫畫。然而,他仍不時對其繪畫的志業充滿疑惑。

As he grew old, he wondered
whether the novelty of his painting might not come from trouble
with his eyes, whether his whole life had not been based upon an accident
of his body.

當他漸行老邁,他懷疑是否因為自己的眼疾,而不可能在繪事上推陳出新,並懷疑自己的一生,是否僅是以身體上某種毛病為基礎的意外?

The hesitation or muddle-headedness of his contemporaries
equaled this strain and self-doubt.

對於他這份努力和伴隨的疑惑,當時人的反應顯得愚蠢而游移不定。

雄伯
他的当代人们昏昧地迟疑不接受他的作品,更强化这种压力与自我疑惑。

“The painting of a drunken privy
cleaner,” said a critic in 1905. Even today, C. Mauclair finds Cézanne’s admissions
of powerlessness an argument against him.

「一位酗酒的神秘清潔工的作品!」一九○五年,某位畫評家有此一說。即使在今天,莫克萊(C.Mauclair)仍以塞尚自認虛弱不堪的自白來貶低他。

Meanwhile, Cézanne’s
paintings have spread throughout the world.

然而,塞尚的畫已傳遍了全世界。

Why so much uncertainty, so
much labor, so many failures, and, suddenly, the greatest success?

為什麼這麼多的不確定,如此大量的勞動,以及經歷如許多的失敗,最後卻突然總結為無與倫比的成就?

Zola, Cézanne’s friend from childhood, was the first to find genius
in him and the first to speak of him as a “genius gone wrong.”

左拉(Zola),這位與塞尚一齊長大的玩伴,是發現塞尚天份的第一人,也是指塞尚為「失常的天才」的第一人。

An observer
of Cézanne’s life such as Zola was, more concerned with his character than
with the sense of his painting, might well consider it a manifestation of
ill health.

左拉無異是塞尚一生的觀察者,他對塞尚性格的關照遠遠超過對其繪畫之意義的關照,當然就認為其性格乃是其病端的表徵。

For as far back as 1852, upon entering the Collège Bourbon at Aix,
Cézanne worried his friends with his fits of temper and depression.

遠溯一八五二年,塞尚在艾克斯(Aix)進入波旁學院(College Bourbon)求學時,就因為忽而暴怒忽而沮喪的性情困擾著他周遭的朋友。

Seven
years later, having decided to become an artist, he doubted his talent and
did not dare to ask his father—a hatter and later a banker—to send him
to Paris.

七年後,他雖已決定要成為畫家,卻懷疑自己的才份,而不敢要求父親--當時是帽商、後來成為銀行家--送他去巴黎。

Zola’s letters reproach him for his instability, his weakness, and
his indecision. When finally he came to Paris, he wrote: “The only thing I
have changed is my location: my ennui has followed me.”

於是左拉去信譴責他的搖擺不定、他的懦弱和優柔寡斷。終於來到巴黎之後,他寫道「唯一改變的是我的位置,那股倦怠無聊仍緊緊跟隨著我。」

He could not
tolerate discussions, because they wore him out and he could never give
his reasoning. His nature was basically anxious.

他受不了討論,因為他常會因為討論而弄得精疲力竭,也因為他沒有能力做任何論證。他天生即是焦慮的脾性。

Thinking that he would
die young, he made his will at the age of forty-two; at forty-six he was for
six months the victim of a violent, tormented, overwhelming passion of
which no one knows the outcome and to which he would never refer.

四十二歲時,由於自認必定早死,所以他早早立了遺囑;四十六歲那年,他曾經有六個月陷在一股澎湃激情的煎熬折磨中,然而沒有任何人知道這股激情得到了什麼樣的結果,塞尚自己也從未提及。

At
fifty-one he withdrew to Aix, in order to find the nature best suited to his
genius but where also he returned to the milieu of his childhood, his
mother and his sister.

他在五十一歲隱退至愛克斯,塞尚發現此處的景緻非常適於揮灑自己的天份,同時,這個地方也讓他回到了童年的世界,一個和媽媽姊姊共同生活的世界。

After the death of his mother, Cézanne turned to
his son for support. “Life is terrifying,” he would often say. Religion, which
he then set about practicing for the first time, began for him in the fear
of life and the fear of death.

母親謝世後,塞尚轉向兒子尋求慰藉。「人生是可怖的,」這是他常掛在嘴邊的話。這份對人生和死亡的恐懼,使得他稍後開始投身宗教。

“It is fear,” he explained to a friend; “I feel I
will be on earth for another four days—what then? I believe in life after
death, and I don’t want to risk roasting in aeternum.”

塞尚向朋友解釋說:「可怕的事情在於,當我感覺自己只有四天可活在世上時--接下來會是什麼呢?我相信來生,而不願冒著為無盡的地獄之火燒烤的風險。」

Although his religion
later deepened, its original motivation was the need to put his life in order
and be relieved of it.

雖然此後他的信仰更加深刻,而原始的動機則是為求安身立命、達成解脫。」

He became more and more timid, mistrustful, and
sensitive. Occasionally he would visit Paris, but when he ran into friends
he would motion to them from a distance not to approach him.

他變得愈來愈怯懦、焦慮不安、敏感而易怒。有一次,他偶然到巴黎去旅遊,老遠就向他的朋友示意不要接近他。

In 1903,
after his pictures had begun to sell in Paris at twice the price of Monet’s
and when young men like Joachim Gasquet and Émile Bernard came to
see him and ask him questions, he relaxed a little. But his fits of anger continued.

一九○三年,當他的畫作在巴黎開始以莫內(Monet)畫作的兩倍價碼賣出,而加斯奎(Joachim Gasquet)和勃納爾(Emile Bernard)這些年輕人開始來拜訪他之際,他的脾氣緩和了些。不過,他那忽爾發作的暴怒卻絲毫未改。

In Aix a child once hit him as he passed by; after that he could not
bear any contact. One day when Cézanne was quite old, Émile Bernard
steadied him as he stumbled. Cézanne flew into a rage.
He could be heard
striding around his studio and shouting that he wouldn’t let anybody “get
his hooks into me.”

(有一次,他在愛克斯的路上被一個小孩撞擊,此後他便無法忍受任何人的親近。)塞尚很老的時候,有一天,勃納爾在他絆倒的剎那扶住了他,塞尚馬上掀起一陣狂怒,有人聽見他在畫室裡踱著大步,走來走去,大喊大叫,說他絕不要「中任何人的圈套」。

Because of these “hooks” he pushed women who could
have modeled for him out of his studio, priests, whom he called “pests,”
out of his life, and Émile Bernard’s theories out of his mind, when they
became too insistent.

為了躲開這些「圈套」,他曾將馬上要成為他的模特兒的女人趕出畫室,將他稱為「冥頑不靈」的教士逐出自己的生命,將勃納爾變得過於堅持的繪畫理論拒斥於心房之外。

This loss of flexible human contact; this inability to master new situations;
this flight into established habits, in a milieu which presented no
problems; this rigid opposition between theory and practice, between the
“hook” and the freedom of a recluse—all these symptoms permit one to
speak of a morbid constitution and more precisely, as, for example, in the
case of El Greco, of schizothymia.

喪失活絡的人際接觸;沒有面對新情境的能力;遁入一個牢固不化的習慣,對任何事都抱著不成問題的態度;堅決反對理論和實際中的「圈套」,以維持隱遁者的自由--以上所有癥兆,我們都可以用一條病理學的規定來說明,就像葛列果(El Greco)的狀況一樣,這些是精神分裂症(schizophrenia)的病兆。

雄伯
Milieu 环境
This rigid opposition between theory and practice,理论与实践的强烈对立
between the
the rigid opposition between “hook” and the freedom of a recluse 「圈套」与隐居者的自由的强烈对立
a morbid constitution 病态的生理行为

The notion of painting “from nature”
could be said to arise from the same weakness.

「根據自然」而畫的理念,亦可以說是來自同樣的缺陷。

His extremely close attention
to nature and to color, the inhuman character of his paintings (he
said that a face should be painted as an object), his devotion to the visible
world: all of these would then only represent a flight from the human
world, the alienation of his humanity.

塞尚極端地注意自然和色彩,他的繪畫所呈現的非人文(inhuman)性格(他說一張臉應該當作一個物體來畫),他對肉眼可見之世界的奉獻……種種跡象顯示了對人文世界的遁逃,及其人性的異化(alienation)。

These conjectures nevertheless do not give any idea of the positive
sense of his work; one cannot thereby conclude that his painting is a phenomenon
of decadence and of what Nietzsche called “impoverished” life
or that it has nothing to say to the educated person.

然而,這些推測並未針對他的作品提出任何正面的解說,我們不能就此將他的畫歸結為精神崩潰的產物,說他是尼采(Nietzsche)所說的「貧瘠虛弱」的生命,或說他的畫對有教養的人而言是毫無意義的。

雄伯
这些推测仍然没有让我们理解,为什么他的作品具有的正面的意义。我们不能因此作为结论地说:他的图画是精神颓废的现象,是尼采所谓的「贫瘠」生命的现象,或是说,他的图画对于受过教育的人,毫无意义。

Zola’s and Émile
Bernard’s belief in Cézanne’s failure probably arise from their having
put too much emphasis on psychology and their personal knowledge of
Cézanne.

左拉和勃納爾之所以認定塞尚是失敗的,恐怕是由於他們太過強調心理學的觀察和自己對塞尚的親身體認。

It is nonetheless possible that Cézanne conceived a form of art
which, while occasioned by his nervous condition, is valid for everyone.

雖然塞尚的精神耗弱,但很可能就是以此精神耗弱為基礎,使他領悟了一種放諸四海而皆準的藝術形式。

雄伯
这仍然是可能的。塞尚因为他的神经衰弱而有这个机缘构想一种适用于每个人的艺术的形式。

Left to himself, he was able to look at nature as only a human being knows
how to do it.

在他孤獨徜徉之際,他或許能以僅有人類才能夠做到的方式來注視自然。

雄伯
当他独处时,他能够注视自然,以仅有人类才知道如何如何注视的方式。

(跟前面所说的inhuman character 非人文的特性对照起来,耐人寻味:是谁inhuman?塞尚?还是我们自己?)

The sense of his work cannot be determined from his life.

其作品的意義實不能由其人生際遇來決定。

This sense will not become any clearer in the light of art history—
that is, by considering influences (the Italian school and Tintoretto, Delacroix,
Courbet, and the impressionists), Cézanne’s technique, or even his
own pronouncements on his work.

即使從藝術史的角度來看--我們可以考察塞尚的畫法所帶來的影響(義大利畫派、丁多瑞多Tintoretto、德拉克瓦Delacroix、辜爾貝Courbet、和印象派畫家),甚至我們援引塞尚對自己作品的論斷,塞尚作品的意義恐怕仍難然獲以得澄清。

雄伯
即使从艺术史的观点 ,也就是,考虑到各种影响 (義大利畫派、丁多瑞多Tintoretto、德拉克瓦Delacroix、辜爾貝Courbet、和印象派畫家),塞尚的技法,或甚至从他对自己作品的论断来看,这个意义并未获得任何澄清。

His first pictures—up to about 1870—are painted fantasies: a rape,
a murder.
塞尚的早期繪畫,約至一八七○年左右,充滿了狂想:強暴,謀殺。

這些作品幾乎都以寬廣的筆觸來處理,著重表現動作的道德面貌,而不著重那些肉眼可見的面向。

Thanks
to the impressionists, he abandoned the baroque technique, which seeks
first to capture movement, for small dabs placed close together and for
patient hatchings.

接受了印象畫派的影響,使塞尚放棄了巴洛克(Baroque)技法,印象派畫家的基本目標是捕捉運動,用小而輕的筆觸緊密設色、點描出影線。

雄伯
which 指的是the baroque technique 巴洛克技法,而非印象派画家,后面的动词seeks是单数动词。
由于印象画派的影响,塞尚放弃著重于捕捉动作的巴洛克技法,而改採紧密一块的轻小笔触,以及耐心的线条阴影的描绘。

It is thanks to the impressionists, and particularly to Pissarro, that Cézanne later conceived painting not as the incarnation of imagined scenes, the projection of dreams outward, but as the exact study of appearances:
less a work of the studio than a working from nature.

由於受到印象派畫家--特別是畢沙羅 (Pissarro) 的影響,塞尚後來認為繪畫並不是想像場景的具象化、或夢幻外顯的結果,而應是表象的精細研究,繪事不僅止於畫室,更應該根據自然。

He quickly parted ways with the impressionists, however. Impressionism
was trying to capture, in the painting, the very way in which objects
strike our eyes and attack our senses. They are therefore almost always executed in broad strokes and
present the moral physiognomy of the actions rather than their visible aspect.

然而,他很快就與印象派畫家分道揚鑣。印象派試圖以繪畫捕捉物體為肉眼乍見和敲擊感官時的特定方式,物體被描繪為它們呈現給瞬間知覺時的表象,它沒有固鎖的輪廓線,而是由光線和空氣使之成形。

Impressionism represented
them in the atmosphere through which instantaneous perception gives
them to us, without absolute contours, bound together by light and air.

To capture this envelope of light, one had to exclude siennas, ochres, and
black and use only the seven colors of the spectrum.

為了掌握此一光線的氛圍,畫者必須放棄赭色、黃土色及黑色,只使用光譜的七色。

In order to represent
the color of objects, it was not enough to put their local tone on the canvas,
that is, the color they take on isolated from their surroundings; one
also had to pay attention to the phenomena of contrast which modify local
colors in nature.

而且,不是僅將物體的各區色調塗上畫布為算了事,換言之,對象的色調不能孤立於其周遭環境之外,還必須注意自然中色區互補的對比現象。

Furthermore, by a sort of reversal, every color we see
in nature elicits the vision of its complement; and these complementaries
heighten one another.

進一步說,我們在自然中所知覺的每一種色彩均會誘發其補充性表象,而這些互補的表象又彼此增強對方的顯現。

To achieve sunlit colors in a picture which will be
seen in the dim light of apartments, not only must there be a green—if
you are painting grass—but also the complementary red which will make
it vibrate.

想在一幅畫中得到草地為陽光所照射的色彩,又明知這幅畫會掛在房裡微弱的燈光下展示,你就不能僅僅使用綠色,還必須補出紅色,才會使那片草地顫動起來。

Finally, the impressionists break down the local tone itself. One
can generally obtain any color by juxtaposing rather than mixing the colors
which make it up, thereby achieving a more vibrant tone.

最後,印象派畫家打破了區域色調本身,畫家可以將細部的色彩並列,而不再將它們混合起來,藉著並列,廣泛的保留所有的色彩,並獲致更具顫動效果的色調。

The result
of these procedures was that the canvas—which no longer corresponded
point by point to nature—restored a general truth of the impression
through the action of the separate parts upon one another.

經過這些程序的處理,畫布上所呈現的--當然已不再是與自然的一一對應--是各個細部的交疊互動而形成的普遍真實的印象。

But at the same
time, depicting the atmosphere and breaking up the tones submerged
the object and caused it to lose its proper weight.
但在同時,舖陳氛圍和打碎色調的方式卻也淹沒了對象,使對象失去了應有的重量。

The composition of
Cézanne’s palette leads one to suppose that he had another aim. Instead
of the seven colors of the spectrum, one finds eighteen colors—six reds,
five yellows, three blues, three greens, and one black.

不過,塞尚調色盤上的配置會讓人認為他與印象派畫家的目標有所不同。他不是用光譜上的七色,而是十八色--六紅、五黃、三藍、三綠及黑。

The use of warm colors
and black shows that Cézanne wants to represent the object, to find it
again behind the atmosphere.

暖色系和黑色的使用顯示了塞尚希望描寫對象,希望在氛圍之外重新挖掘出對象。

Likewise, he does not break up the tone;
rather, he replaces this technique with graduated mixtures, with a progression
of chromatic nuances across the object, with a modulation of colors
which stays close to the object’s form and to the light it receives.

另外,他也未將色調瓦解為細小的筆觸,而寧以漸進色取代這個技巧,以色彩的微小差異漸進地佈施於對象,將色彩調整到接近對象的外觀和它所受的光。

The suppression
of exact contours in certain cases and giving color priority over
the outline obviously do not have the same sense in Cézanne and in impressionism.

某些狀況下,他更乾脆撤除明確的輪廓線,讓色彩較線條更具優位--對塞尚和印象派畫家而言,這個分歧點即意味著他們之間的差異。

The object is no longer covered by reflections and lost in
its relationships to the air and to other objects: it seems subtly illuminated
from within, light emanates from it, and the result is an impression of solidity
and material substance.

對象不再為折射的光所覆蓋,而失去它與氛圍和與其他對象之間的關連,它似乎微微地由內部發光,光線由它的內部發散出來,因而形成一種固著狀態和物質實體的印象。

雄伯
對象不再為折射的光所覆蓋,不再迷失于氛圍和與其他對象關連中。对象似乎微微地由內部發光,光線由它的內部發散出來,因而形成一種固著狀態和物質實體的印象。
lost 在此是过去分词,与前面的covered 对等,no longer covered and lost

Moreover, Cézanne does not give up making
the warm colors vibrate, but achieves this chromatic sensation through
the use of blue.

再者,塞尚並未放棄製造暖色系的震顫效果,但卻改用藍色來獲致這種上色的效果。

One must therefore say that Cézanne wished to return to the object
without abandoning the impressionist aesthetic which takes nature as its
model.

如果說印象派畫家的美學是將自然當作他們的模特兒,則我們必須接續上文的論證,說塞尚是企圖回到對象本身而並不放棄印象派的美學。

Émile Bernard reminded him that, for the classical artists, painting
demanded outline, composition, and distribution of light.

勃納爾曾提醒塞尚,對於古典的藝術家來說,繪畫要求的是輪廓、構圖和光線的分佈。

Cézanne
replied: “They created pictures; we are attempting a piece of nature.”

塞尚回答道:「不錯,他們創作的是一幅幅的圖畫,而我們追求的則是一幅幅的自然。」

He
said of the old masters that they “replaced reality with imagination and by
the abstraction which accompanies it.” Of nature, he said, “the artist must
conform to this perfect work of art.

提到那些古典大師時,他說他們「以想像力和伴隨而生的抽象化取代了真實。」論及自然時,他說:「藝術家必須順從這件完美的藝術品。

Everything comes to us from nature;
we exist through it; let us forget everything else.” He stated that he wanted
to turn impressionism into “something solid, like the art in the museums.”
所有的事物均是透過自然來到我們的面前;我們仰賴自然而存在:除自然之外,再也沒有什麼值得記憶了。」他說他希望使印象主義變得「更堅實,就像那些博物館中的藝術一樣。」

His painting would be a paradox: investigate reality without departing
from sensations, with no other guide than the immediate impression of
nature, without following the contours, with no outline to enclose the
color, with no perspectival or pictorial composition.

他的繪畫是很弔詭的:既想追求真實,又不放棄感官的外貌;而除了取法來自自然的直接印象外,別無索引;不循輪廓線作畫,不用輪廓線框限住色彩,也不採視點或構圖上的安排。

This is what Bernard
called Cézanne’s suicide: aiming for reality while denying himself the
means to attain it.

勃納爾認為塞尚這樣做無異是自殺:追求真實卻自絕於通向真實之技道。

This is the reason for his difficulties and for the distortions
one finds in his pictures between 1870 and 1890. Cups and saucers
on a table seen from the side should be elliptical, but Cézanne paints the
two ends of the ellipse swollen and expanded.

塞尚陷入困惑的理由就在這裡。而在他一八七○到九○年間作品中所呈現的那股扭曲不安,理由亦在此。桌子上的茶杯和杯托,由側邊看過去應該是橢圓的,但塞尚把這個橢圓的兩端畫得臃腫膨大。

The work table in his portrait
of Gustave Geffroy stretches, contrary to the laws of perspective, into
the lower part of the picture.

在古斯塔夫‧喬弗瑞(Gustave Geoffrey)的肖像畫中,那張工作檯拉得非常長,直伸向此畫的底部,這顯然違反了視點法則。

By departing from the outline, Cézanne
would be handing himself over to the chaos of the sensations. Now, the
sensations would capsize the objects and constantly suggest illusions—for
example, the illusion we have when we move our heads that objects themselves
are moving—if our judgment did not constantly set these appearances straight.
由於放棄了輪廓線,塞尚使自己陷溺於感覺的混沌之中,這種混沌常常會干擾對象而引生出幻覺--譬如,若我們搖晃自己的腦袋,這時所見的對象好像自己正在搖動一樣--除非我們已在判斷中認定了表象本是直挺不動的。

According to Bernard, Cézanne engulfed “the painting in
ignorance and his mind in shadows.”

照勃納爾的說法,塞尚「將他的畫埋沒在無知裡,將他的心埋沒在陰影中。」

In fact, one can judge his painting in this way only by letting half of
what he said drop away and only by closing one’s eyes to what he painted.

作是,若要這樣子來評斷塞尚,只能說評斷者對塞尚的話只聽了一半、對塞尚的畫也只看了一半。

It is clear from his conversations with Émile Bernard that Cézanne
was always seeking to avoid the ready-made alternatives suggested to him:
the senses versus intelligence; the painter who sees versus the painter who
thinks; nature versus composition; primitivism versus tradition.

在跟勃納爾的對話中,塞尚總是刻意避開任何對方所提出的現成選項,如:感覺相對於判斷;看的畫家相對於思考的畫家;自然相對於構圖;素人畫家相對於傳統學院畫家。

“We have
to develop an optics,” Cézanne said, “by which I mean a logical vision—
that is, one with nothing absurd.”

塞尚說:「我們必須發展一種光學,這種光學即是我所謂的邏輯的視覺--換言之,這種視覺中全然沒有荒謬的成份。」

“Are you speaking of our nature?” asked
Bernard. Cézanne: “It has to do with both.” “But aren’t nature and art different?”

勃納爾問:「你這不是在說我們所面對的自然嗎?」塞尚說:「這種光學兩者都要處理。」「然而自然和藝術不是完全不同的兩回事嗎?」

“I want to unite them. Art is a personal apperception. I place this
apperception in the sensations and I ask intelligence to organize them
into a work.”1

「我就是希望把它們弄成一回事。藝術是個人的親身感受,這些感受在感覺中具現出來,並在我的知性要求下組織成一幅畫。」

But even these formulas put too much emphasis on the ordinary
notions of “sensibility” or “sensations” and “intelligence”—which
is why Cézanne could not persuade and this is why he liked to paint better.

但即使是這些敘述,也過度強調了「感受性」、「感覺」和「知性」這些普通的理念,這也就是為什麼塞尚寧願去畫,而不能信賴自己的論證有什麼說服力。

Rather than apply to his work dichotomies, which moreover belong
more to the scholarly traditions than to the founders—philosophers or
painters—of these traditions, we would do better to let ourselves be persuaded
to the proper sense of his painting, which is to challenge those dichotomies.

他也不喜歡讓自己的作品受二分法的擺佈,說是較接近保存傳統的作風,或較接近推動傳統的作風。他所致力的是繪畫的真正意義,因而必須經常地質疑傳統。

Cézanne did not think he had to choose between sensation
and thought, as if he were deciding between chaos and order. He did not
want to separate the stable things which appear before our gaze and their
fleeting way of appearing.

塞尚並不認為他必須在感情與思想間抉擇,在秩序與混沌間取捨;他也不想將我們眼見的靜物和它們顯現的變化樣態割裂開來。

He wanted to paint matter as it takes on form,
the birth of order through spontaneous organization. He makes a basic
distinction not between “the senses” and “intelligence” but rather between
the spontaneous order of perceived things and the human order of
ideas and sciences.
他希望將事物描畫得如其外觀所呈現的樣貌,在自發性的組織中引生出秩序來。他做了一個基本的區別,但並不是「感性」、「知性」之類的分別,而是區分出我們知覺中事物的自發組合,和依賴觀念、科學所做出的人為的組合。

We perceive things; we agree about them; we are anchored
in them; and it is with “nature” as our base that we construct the
sciences.

我們看到事物;我們與它們交融;我們停泊於它們之中;而我們建構的各門科學乃以此「自然」為根基的。

Cézanne wanted to paint this primordial world, and this is why
his pictures give us the impression of nature at its origin, while photographs
of the same landscapes suggest man’s works, conveniences, and
imminent presence.

塞尚想要畫出這個原初世界(primordial world),他的畫似乎因此將自然表現得素淨純粹,相對於同樣的風景照片來看,照片本身提示了人工、便捷而急迫的呈現。

Cézanne never wished to “paint like a savage.” He
wanted to put intelligence, ideas, sciences, perspective, and tradition back
in touch with the world of nature which they were intended to comprehend.
He wished, as he said, to confront the sciences with the nature
“from which they came.”

這並不是說塞尚曾想要「像一個野人般作畫」。他只是想把智巧、觀念、科學、視點和傳統都放回與自然世界保持接觸的狀態裡去,在此狀態中,它們必須融合為一個整體。如同他所說的,他希望將各門科學帶到「它們所從出的」自然面前。

By remaining faithful to the phenomena in his investigations of perspective,
Cézanne discovered what recent psychologists have come to formulate:
the lived perspective, that of our perception, is not a geometric
or photographic one.

由於塞尚一直忠實於現象本身,在他對視點的探究中,他發現了晚近心理學家所發掘出來的--生活的視點(lived perspective)。這是我們日常知覺的真正狀態,它不同於幾何式和攝影式的視點。

In perception, the objects that are near appear
smaller, those far away larger, than they do in a photograph, as we see in
the cinema when an approaching train gets bigger much faster than a
real train would under the same circumstances.

一張照片裡面的物體,若與我們實際去看相比較,我們會發現,照片近處的物體在實地看時變得比較小,而照片遠方的物體在實地看時則顯得比較大。(電影裡面也有類似情形:在相同條件下,一列火車由遠方駛近,在影片中變大的速度比實地上火車變大的速度要快得多。)

To say that a circle seen
obliquely is seen as an ellipse is to substitute for our actual perception the
schema of what we would have to see if we were cameras. In fact, we see a
form which oscillates around the ellipse without being an ellipse.

因此,如果說斜看一平面圓形即是看到一橢圓,就等於以相機來取代我們實際的知覺,因為,我們實際所見的形狀,乃似橢圓而非橢圓的未決形狀。

雄伯

假如我们说,倾斜角度观看的圆形,被作为椭圆形来观看,那等于是,我们的实际的知觉被这种基模所取代,假如我们是照相机,我们必然会看见的东西这样的基模。实际上,我们看见一个形式环绕椭园形摇摆,但是它并不是椭园形。

In a portrait of Mme Cézanne, the border of the wallpaper on one side of her
body does not form a straight line with that on the other: and indeed it is
known that if a line passes beneath a wide strip of paper, the two visible
segments appear dislocated.

在一幅塞尚夫人的肖像中,夫人身體兩側的壁紙邊緣並未形成一直線,而事實上,眾所皆知,一直線若通過一條不透明寬紙帶底下,則其兩段可見的分節會顯得脫了臼。

雄伯
在一幅塞尚夫人的肖像中,夫人身體的一侧的壁纸的边缘,跟身体的另一侧的边缘,并没有形成一条直线。的确,众所周知,假如一条线从一条宽长的纸底下通过,两个看得见的片段看起来像是脱臼分开。

Gustave Geffroy’s table stretches into the bottom
of the picture, and indeed, when our eye runs over a large surface,
the images it successively receives are taken from different points of view,
and the whole surface is warped.

古斯塔夫‧喬弗瑞的桌子伸進圖畫的底部,而事實上,當我們透視一大塊面的時候,我們所連續接收到的意象,並不是以同一視點構成的,因而整個塊面會翹曲起來。

雄伯
古斯塔夫‧喬弗瑞的桌子伸進圖畫的底部。的确,當我們的眼睛览视一大塊表面时,我們眼睛連續接收到的各种意象,从许多不同的观点获得,因而整個塊面會翹曲起來。

It is true that I freeze these distortions
in repainting them on the canvas; I stop the spontaneous movement in
which they pile up in perception and tend toward the geometric perspective.

因此,我將這些翹曲凝塑於畫布之繪事中並未偏離真實,我等於是中止了一個自發的運動。這些翹曲在知覺中進行此項運動而漸漸累積,進而形成一幾何學的視點。

雄伯
的确,当我将这些意象重新绘画在画布时,我凝冻了这些翘曲。我中止这个自动自发的运动,在运动中
这些翘曲在知觉中堆积起来,并且倾向于几何学的透视法。

This is also what happens with colors. Pink upon gray paper colors
the background green.

同樣的事亦發生在色彩中。把玫瑰紅色塗在灰紙上,當作綠色的背景。

雄伯
Colors 在此是动词,作「改变颜色」解释,而非名词「颜色」,
同樣的事亦發生在色彩中。将粉红色加在灰色之上,会将背景改变成为绿色/

Academic painting shows the background as gray,
assuming that the picture will produce the same effect of contrast as the
real object.

學院派的繪畫會把背景仍當作灰色,而假定畫面可產生現實事物中的相同對比效果。

雄伯
學院派的繪畫则是显示背景作为灰色,因为它们假定,畫面可產生跟現實事物相同的對照的效果。

Impressionist painting uses green in the background in order
to achieve a contrast as brilliant as that of objects in nature. Doesn’t this
falsify the color relationship?

印象派繪畫則將此狀態的背景當作綠色,以便獲得如同事物處於自然中一般的鮮明對比效果。
。然而,如此一來,不是曲解了色彩的關係嗎?
雄伯
印象派的绘画则是使用绿色当背景,为了获得鲜明的对照,如同客体在自然界的的鲜明对照。这难道不是会让颜色的关系变成不真实?

It would if it stopped there, but the painter’s
task is to modify all the other colors in the picture so that they take away
from the green background its characteristics of a real color.

若僅停留在上述的層次,好像是很有問題,但畫家的工作乃是調整畫面中所有的其他顏色,以便讓它們由這般的綠色背景中獲得自己顏色的真實特性。

雄伯
假如它仅是停在那里,那将会颜色的关系成为不真实。但是画家的工作就是要修改图画中的所有的其他颜色,这样它们才能够从绿色的背景,拿走掉绿色作为真实颜色的特征。

Similarly, it is Cézanne’s genius that when the overall composition of the picture is
seen globally, perspectival distortions are no longer visible in their own
right but rather contribute, as they do in natural vision, to the impression
of an emerging order, an object in the act of appearing, organizing itself
before our eyes.

同樣的,塞尚的才份在於,當整個構圖看起來是圓球狀時,視點的翹曲本身會隱而不現,如同它們在日常視覺中的運作,甚至它能夠幫助我們對浮現中的秩序產生印象,也能夠幫助對象在我們眼前進行表象和形構自身的活動。

雄伯
同樣的,塞尚的才份在於,當图画的整個構圖从球形角度观看时,視點的翹曲本身不再看得见。相反地,如同它們在日常視象中的運作,它们促成这个印象:在我们的眼前,有个正在浮现的秩序,一个客体正在出现当中,组织它自己。

In the same way, the contour of objects, conceived as a
line encircling the objects, belongs not to the visible world, but to geometry.

同理可知,物體的輪廓線若被構想成一條包圍著物體的實線,此線即顯然不屬於我們肉眼所見的世界,而屬於幾何學的世界。

雄伯
同样地,物体的轮廓,被构想作为环绕各个物体旋转的实线。各物体的轮廓并不属于可见的世界,而是属于几何学。

belongs 的主词是the contour of objects,而不是a line

If one outlines the contour of an apple with a continuous line, one
turns the contour into a thing, whereas the contour is rather the ideal
limit toward which the sides of the apple recede in depth. To outline no
contour would be to deprive the objects of their identity.

如果有人為一顆蘋果描出一條外形的連續線,他便製成了一個這種形狀的對象,但同時這條輪廓線也只是一條理想的界線,而讓這個蘋果的各個側面都失去了深度。更別提有哪一種形狀是不會奪走對象的正身(identity)的了。

雄伯
假如有人用一条连续的线描绘一颗蘋果的轮廓,他会将这个轮廓转变成为物体。另一方面,这个轮廓也是理想的限制,蘋果的各个侧面在深度方面,会朝这个限制消退。不画上任何轮廓,将是替各个物体剥夺它们的身份。

To outline just
one contour sacrifices depth—that is, the dimensions which give us the
thing, not as spread out before us, but as full of reserves and as an inexhaustible
reality.

只描出一條輪廓線,必然會犧牲了深度,換言之,事物所呈現的向度(dimension),並不是攤開了擺平在我們的面前,而是充滿了錯綜交雜、無可窮盡的現實(reality)。

That is why Cézanne follows the swelling of the object in
a colored modulation, and outlines several contours in blue lines. Referred
from one to the other, the gaze captures a contour that emerges from
among them all, just as it does in perception.

於是我們才明白,塞尚撙節調運色彩時,為何要隨順著對象的起伏而勾勒出許多條藍色的輪廓線。我們在這些線條間往返流連,然後在某一瞥中掌握了自這些線條中浮現而出的形狀,如同我們在知覺過程中所經歷的一樣。

雄伯
那就是为什么塞尚用彩色的调配,来遵循物体的膨胀,并且用蓝色的线条勾勒好几个轮廓。当眼光从一个轮廓转到另一个轮廓时,眼光捕捉从它们当中出现的一个轮廓,如同它在知觉中所为。

Nothing could be less arbitrary
than these famous distortions which, moreover, Cézanne abandoned
in his last period, after 1890, when he no longer filled his canvases with
colors and when he gave up the closely woven texture of his still lifes.

因此,我們無論如何都不能說這些翹曲乃塞尚任意獨斷之作,況且,塞尚在一八九○年以後--他的最後一個時期,放棄了這種有名的構圖法,同時,不再將畫布上滿顏料,也放棄了靜物的細密構織的畫法。

The drawing must therefore result from the colors, if one wants the
world to be rendered in its thickness.

因此,如果要呈現出世界的真實厚度,輪廓就必須由色彩來完成。

For the world is a mass without gaps,
an organism of colors across which the receding perspective, the contours,
the angles, and the curves are set up as lines of force; the spatial
frame is constituted by vibrating.

由於世界如同一個沒有區隔的團塊,一個色彩的系統,上面交錯鐫刻著隱藏的觀點、輪廓線、角度和曲線,當空間結構成形的時候,它本身會顫動。

“The drawing and the color are no
longer distinct. Gradually as you paint, you draw; the more the colors harmonize,
the more the drawing becomes precise. . . . When the color is at
its richest, the form is at its fullest.”

「輪廓和色彩彼此再也不相區分,只要我們去畫,輪廓之勾勒就在其中,而且,色彩愈諧調,輪廓就愈明確……當色彩的豐富性達到飽和時,形體就獲致了充實性。」

Cézanne does not try to use color to
suggest the tactile sensations which would give form and depth. These distinctions
between touch and sight are unknown in primordial perception.
It is only as a result of a science of the human body that we finally learn to
distinguish between our senses.

塞尚並不是想以色彩來提示觸覺,藉之強化形狀和深度,觸覺和視覺的這些區別,在始初的知覺中並沒有分別。我們之所以學會區分五官,只是由於人體科學的影響。

The lived object is not rediscovered or
constructed on the basis of the data of the senses; rather, it presents itself
to us from the start as the center from which the data radiate.

生活的對象並非以我們感官贊助為基礎,它其實從一開始就將自己呈現給我們,而感官的贊助是以它為中心才傳達出來的。

We see the
depth, the smoothness, the softness, the hardness of objects; Cézanne
even claimed that we see their odor.

我們看到對象的深度、平滑度、柔軟度和堅硬度,塞尚甚至認為我們看到對象的氣味。

If the painter wants to express the
world, the arrangement of his colors must bear within this arrangement
this indivisible Whole, or else his painting will only be an allusion to the
things and will not give them in the imperious unity, the presence, the insurpassable
fullness which is for us the definition of the real.

如果畫家要表達世界,他的色彩調度中必須帶有這不可分的整體,否則他的畫將只是在暗示事物,而未能給事物以緊密的統一、臨場、無以凌越的充實,也就是我們定義中的真實。

That is why
each brushstroke must satisfy an infinite number of conditions; that is why
Cézanne sometimes meditated for an hour before putting down a certain
stroke, for, as Bernard said, each stroke must “contain the air, the light,
the object, the composition, the character, the drawing, and the style.” Expressing
what exists is an endless task.

這就是為什麼每一筆觸都必須滿足無限的條件。塞尚有時在下手畫某一筆之前會左思右想好幾個小時,誠如勃納爾所言,是因為每一筆都必須「包含有空氣、光線、對象、構圖、形質、輪廓、和風格。」表達存在的事物是一件永無止境的工作。

Nor did Cézanne neglect the physiognomy of objects and faces: he
simply wanted to capture it emerging from the color.

塞尚也沒有忽視物體和臉孔的樣貌,他只是希望由色彩中掌握正在浮現的對象樣貌。

Painting a face “as
an object” is not to strip it of its “thought.” “I agree that the painter must
interpret it,” said Cézanne, “the painter is not an imbecile.”

把一張臉「當作物體」來畫,並不是要剝除它的「思想」,塞尚說:「我真正瞭解到畫家是在詮釋它」,「畫家並不是低能」。

But this interpretation
must not be a thought separated from vision. “If I paint all the
little blues and all the little browns, I make it gaze as he gazes.

這種詮釋不應是一種反省,而與看的動作有什麼不同。「如果我以密織的藍色和栗紅色來畫,我就能恰如其分地捉住他的一瞥。

雄伯
但是这种解释一定不要是跟视象分开的思想。「假如我画所有的细密蓝色与所有的细密粟红色,我会让视象凝视,如同他在凝视。

Who gives
a damn if they have any idea how one can sadden a mouth or make a cheek
smile by wedding a shaded green to a red.”

有些人對此很不以為然,他們覺得這無異於將暗綠色和紅色配對,來顯示一張悲傷的嘴或微笑的臉頰一樣的荒謬。」

雄伯
根本没有人在乎,即使他们知道画家是如何凭借将渐层的绿色跟红色搭配一块,才让嘴巴显出悲伤样子,或是让脸颊显出微笑样子。

The mind is seen and read in
the gazes, which are, however, only colored wholes. Other minds are given
to us only as incarnate, as belonging to faces and gestures.

人物的性格在他的一瞥眼神中被看見和把抓到,然而,這一瞥卻不過是色彩的組合。他人的心靈對我們而言只能以肉身來呈現,就好像其心靈寄寓在臉龐和表情姿態中。

雄伯
心灵在各种凝视里被看见与被阅读。可是这些凝视仅是彩色的整体。其他的心灵被给予我们,仅是作为一个化身,作为属于脸孔与姿态。

It serves no
purpose to oppose here the distinctions between the soul and the body,
thought and vision, since Cézanne returns to just that primordial experience
out of which these notions are pulled and which gives them to us as
inseparable.

由於塞尚回到了吾人的原初經驗,使得身體與靈魂、思想與視見間的矛盾和區分變得沒有必要,它們是一同來自於原本混同不分的原初經驗。

雄伯
在此将灵魂与身体,思想与视见之间的区别作为对立,并没有任何目的。因为塞尚回到仅是这些观念从那里被抽离出来的那种原初经验。那种原初经验将这些观念给予我们,作为是无法分开的经验。

The painter who thinks and seeks the expression first misses
the mystery—renewed every time we gaze at someone—of a person’s appearing
in nature.

那些尋求表現又將表現加以概念化的畫家,首先就錯失了一大奧祕--人出現於自然中,其表象在我們注視下無時無刻不在更新。

雄伯
思想而且寻求表达的画家,首先错过的就是人出现在自然中的这个奥秘。每当我们凝视某个人时,这个奥秘就在更新。

In The Wild Ass’s Skin Balzac describes a “tablecloth
white as a layer of fresh-fallen snow, upon which the place settings rose
symmetrically, crowned with blond rolls.”

巴爾札克(Balzac)在『憂鬱人生』(La Peau de chagrin)中描述,「桌布白得如同一層新雪,桌面上的擺設對稱地捲起,像鑲上了一些起伏縐摺。」塞尚說:

雄伯
巴尔扎克在「驴皮记」描述「一块桌巾洁白如新降的一层初雪,在桌巾上面,餐具均称地隆起,顶端摆放的是棕色的面包。」

“All through my youth,” said
Cézanne, “I wanted to paint that, that tablecloth of fresh-fallen snow. . . . Now I know that one must only want to paint ‘rose, symmetrically, the place settings’ and ‘blond rolls.’

“All through youth, ” said Cézanne, “I wanted to paint that, that tablecloth of new snow… Now I know that one must will only to paint the place-settings rising symmetrically and the blond rolls.

「整個青年時代,我盼望著能夠畫出那如新雪的桌布……現在我明瞭,我們只能夠盼望畫出那對稱地捲起桌面擺設和起伏縐摺。

雄伯
「在我整个青春时期,」巴尔扎克说,「我想要画出那个,那个洁白如新降的初雪的桌巾….现在我明瞭,一个人必须仅是意愿要绘画出那些餐具均称地隆起,以及那些棕色的面包。」

If I painted ‘crowned’ I’m done for, you
understand? But if I really balance and shade my place settings and rolls
as they are in nature, you can be sure the crowns, the snow and the whole
shebang will be there.”

如果我把「鑲嵌了的」感覺畫出來,我就算辦到了,你了解嗎?而如果我按照這些擺飾物和縐摺在自然中的狀態,加以平衡並畫出陰影,我保證你連那些鑲嵌、白雪和其他的刺激物都會呈現出來。」

If I paint
‘crowned’ I’ve had it, you understand? But if I really balance and shade my place settings and rolls as they are in nature, then you can be sure that the crowns, the snow, and all the excitement will be there too. ”

假如我画出「顶端放置」,那我就完蛋了,你们了解吗?但是假如我确实平衡并画出餐具与面包的阴影,如同它们在自然当中,你们能够确定,这些顶端,雪,与整个系统都会呈现出来。)

We live in the midst of man-made objects, among tools, in houses,
streets, cities, and most of the time we see them only through the human
actions which put them to use. We become used to thinking that all of
this exists necessarily and unshakably

我們生活在人造物的氛圍當中,在工具間、在房舍中、在街道、城市裡面,大多數時間,我們只將這些人造物置於人文活動的使用角度來看它們,我們變得慣於認定這種物的存在是必然而無可動搖的。

. Cézanne’s painting suspends these
habits and reveals the base of inhuman nature upon which man has installed
himself.

塞尚的繪事將這些思考習慣置於質疑中,而揭露了非人文性的自然,它是人類安身立命的基礎。

雄伯
塞尚的图画悬置这些习惯,并且揭露出人类置身其上的非人类的自然的基础。

This is why Cézanne’s people are strange, as if viewed by a
creature of another species. Nature itself is stripped of the attributes
which make it ready for animistic communions: there is no wind in the
landscape, no movement on the Lac d’Annecy, the frozen objects hesitate
as at the beginning of the world. It is an unfamiliar world in which one
is uncomfortable and which forbids all human effusiveness.

這也就是為何塞尚筆下的人顯得奇怪,好像是不同族群生物眼光下的產物;自然本身被剝卻了所有可用以聯結定形的屬性,地景裡沒有風,安西湖(Lac d’Annecy)面沒有任何波瀾,凝固的對象就如同在世界之始初般的猶豫不安。這樣一個不熟悉的世界,令人覺得不適,也禁止任何人文的情思。

雄伯

这就是为什么塞尚的人物显得怪异,好像是由非人类的生物在观看。自然本身被剥夺掉让它准备从事万物有灵的沟通的属性:风景里没有风,安西湖没有波动,冰冻的各种物体犹豫不安,好像在世界的开始。这样的熟悉的世界,人在里面感到不自在,并且让所有人性的情怀无法舒展。

Animism—the doctrine that all natural objects and the universe itself have souls 所有的自然的物体与宇宙本身具有灵魂的信念
Communion—The sharing of personal thoughts and feelings 个人的思想与感觉到分享沟通

If one looks at the work of other painters after seeing Cézanne’s paintings, one feels
somehow relaxed, just as conversations resumed after a period of mourning
mask the absolute change and restore to the survivors their solidity.

如果我們在看過了塞尚的畫之後,再去看其他畫家的作品,我們會感到大大的鬆了一口氣,就像是在遽變中隨之而來的悲傷退去,對話重新開始,生存者在對話中重拾其固存性。

雄伯
假如我们观看塞尚的图画之后,再观看其他的画家的作品,我们感觉相当地轻松。就像悼亡的时期过后,重新开始的对谈交流,用来掩饰绝对的生死无常,并且让依旧存活的家人恢复他们的凝聚团结。

But indeed only a human being is capable of such a vision, which penetrates
right to the root of things beneath constituted humanity. All indications
are that animals cannot gaze at [regarder] things, cannot penetrate
them in expectation of nothing but the truth.

但是,事實上只有人類才能運用這樣的觀點,穿透對事物的人文性編納秩序,而直達事物之根柢。所有的跡象顯示,動物無法注視事物,無法以僅為企求真相的方式來透視事物。

雄伯
但是,的确,仅有人类能够从事这样的视象。这样的视象直接贯穿到被形成的人性底下的各种物象的根柢。一切迹象显示,动物无法「凝视」物象,无法仅是企求真相地贯穿物象。

Gaze at (regarder)英译gaze at 用斜体字,又括弧附法文,强调「凝视」的意涵不仅是一般的注视或观看。而是,仅是企求真相地注视,才叫凝视。这是具有其他意图性的动物或人的眼睛无法做到的。

Émile Bernard’s statement
that a realistic painter is only an ape is therefore precisely the opposite of
the truth, and one sees how Cézanne was able to revive the classical definition
of art: man added to nature.

因此,勃納爾認為一個真正寫實的畫家必須像一隻猿猴,恰好是說到了真理的反面,而我們看到了塞尚如何以其才份恢復了藝術的古典定義:人類對自然的附言。

雄伯

勃纳尔说「写实的画家仅是人猿」,这句陈述跟真理恰恰背道而驰。我们看见塞尚是如何地复興艺术的古典定义:艺术是被增添到自然的人。
added to nature不是过去式,而是过去分词片语,修饰man,整句的定义是Art is man who is added to nature的省略。
庞蒂并不认同勃纳尔艺术模拟自然的「写实的画家仅是人猿」。庞蒂赞赏塞尚的「艺术是被增添到自然的人」。也就是,艺术家凭借艺术,融入自然,与永恒的自然同在,成为自然的部分。

Cézanne’s painting denies neither science nor tradition. He went to
the Louvre every day when he was in Paris. He believed that one must
learn how to paint and that the geometric study of planes and forms is necessary.

塞尚的繪事未排斥科學,亦未排斥傳統。他在巴黎時每天都去羅浮宮。他認為要會畫畫必須學習,而學習過程中的必要部分,是對平面和圖形的幾何學研究。

He inquired about the geological structure of his landscapes.
These abstract relationships must be operative in the act of painting, but
ruled over by the visible world. Anatomy and design are present in each
stroke of his brush just as the rules of the game underlie each stroke of a
tennis match.

他鑽研所繪地景的地質學結構,相信這些由可見世界所表現出來的抽象關係,必會影響到繪畫行動。解剖和設計的規則呈現在他的每一筆觸之中,好比網球賽中每一次觸擊都蘊含了遊戲規則。

雄伯
他鑽研所繪地景的地質學結構。地景结构的这些抽象关系必须运作在绘画的行动过程,但是却必须受到可见世界的统辖。解剖与设计呈现在他的画笔的每一笔触当中。正如遊戏规则作为网球赛的每一触击的基础。

What motivates the painter’s movement can never be perspective
alone or geometry alone or the laws governing the breakdown
of colors, or, for that matter, any particular knowledge.

但是,讓畫家積極畫將起來的,絕不僅是視點、幾何學、色彩規則或任何特定的知識。

雄伯
激发画家绘画动作的动机,永远不会仅是视景,或仅是几何学,或统辖颜色的散佈,或有关绘画的任何特殊的知识。

Motivating all the
movements from which a picture gradually emerges there can be only one
motif: the landscape in its totality and in its absolute fullness, precisely
what Cézanne called a “motif.”

只有一件事情能夠讓畫家積極動手作畫:地景的整體性和它絕對的充實性,也就是塞尚所稱的「主題」(motif)。

雄伯
激发图画逐渐成形的所有的动作的动机,仅可能是一个母题:处于完整状态与绝对充实的地景。这确实就是塞尚所谓的「母题」。

He would start by discovering the geological
foundation of the landscape; then, according to Mme Cézanne, he
would halt and gaze, eyes dilated; he “germinated” with the countryside.

根據塞尚夫人所說,塞尚的地景畫的開始就是去弄明白地景的地質學基礎,然後他會以拓寬了的視野停留注視每一樣東西,和鄉野共同「吐芽成長」。

雄伯
他常常以发现地景的地质学的基础作为开始。依照塞尚夫人的说法,他常常停下来凝视,眼睛张得大大的,他跟乡野一块「滋长」。

What was at issue, all science forgotten, was to recapture, through these sciences,
the constitution of the landscape as an emerging organism.

他所必須要做到的事,首先是忘掉他由科學那兒所學來的一切;其次,要穿透這些科學去重新把抓地景的結構,把地景當作正在浮現的有機體。

雄伯
当浑然忘记所有的智慧时,具有争议的事情是如何凭借这些科学,重新捕捉地景的结构,作为正在浮现的有机体。

Science– Ability to produce solutions in some problem domain 智慧,解决难题的能力
Science– A particular branch of scientific knowledge 科学

All the partial views that the gaze catches sight of must be welded together; all
that the eye’s versatility disperses must be reunited; one must, as Gasquet
put it, “join the wandering hands of nature.”

要做到這種程度,所有視覺上的一偏之見都必須合而為一,所有眼睛之能事都必須重新整合,如同加斯奎(Gasquet)所言,必須「將自然所遊走出去的手結合在一起。」

雄伯
凝视瞥见的所有的部分视景必须衔接一块。眼睛的能力所驱散的一切东西,必须重新统合。如同加斯奎所言,我们必须将「自然的漫遊的手连接起来」。

“A minute of the world is
going by which must be painted in its full reality.

「世界所歷經的一瞬,繪畫必須窮盡其整全之實在。」

雄伯
某个时刻的这个世界必须保持在它的充实的现实里被绘画,它正在消逝当中。

” The meditation was suddenly complete: “I have a hold on my motif,” Cézanne would say, and
he explained that the landscape had to be tackled neither too high nor
too low, caught alive in a net which would let nothing escape.

他的冥想有時會達於極致,他會說:「我有我的主題」,而且他會解釋,地景要放在中間,不可太高或太低,要在沒有漏失掉任何東西的狀況下以網羅活捉。

雄伯说
冥想突然地成为完整:「我掌握我的母题」,塞尚经常说。他解释,地景必须被处理,不要太高,也不要太低,活生生地捕捉它,在没有任何疏漏的网络里。

Then he
attacked his picture from all sides at once, using patches of color to surround
his original charcoal sketch of the geological skeleton.

然後他就同時開始畫這幅畫的每一部分,用色彩圍繞嵌補著早先地質架構的炭筆素描。

雄伯
然后他同时从各个角度来描绘他的图画,使用块状的颜色围绕他原先的地质学轮廓的炭笔素描。

The image saturated itself, composed itself, drew itself, became balanced; it came to
maturity all at once. “The landscape thinks itself in me,” he said, “and I
am its consciousness.” Nothing could be farther from naturalism than this
intuitive science.

畫面帶著充實性和厚度,在結構和平衡中成長,最後似乎是在一瞬間趨於成熟。塞尚說:「地景透過我來思考自身,我即它的意識。」這種直觀的科學和自然主義是相去甚遠的。

雄伯译
画面饱满自身,组合自身,绘画自身,成为平衡,画面突然达到成熟。「地景在我身上思维自身,我就是地景的意识。」这种直觉的智慧绝非是自然主义。

Science– Ability to produce solutions in some problem domain 在某个困难的领域,产生解决的能力
Gay science –joyful wisdom 欢愉的智慧

Far from—by no means 绝非是,根本就不是
Nothing could be farther from my intention than to offend you.
=I have no intention at all of offending you.
我没有丝毫要冒犯你的意思。

Art is not imitation, nor is it something manufactured according to the wishes of instinct or good taste.

Art is not imitation, nor is it something manufactured according to the wishes of instinct or good taste.

藝術並不是模擬(imitation),也不是按照教養或各人興之所至成就的手工製品。

雄伯译
艺术并非模拟。艺术也不是依照本能的愿望或良好品味而制造的东西。

It is a process of expression. Just as the function of words is to name—that is, to grasp the nature of what appears to us in a confused way and to place it before us as a recognizable object—so it is up to the painter, said Gasquet, to “objectify,” “project,” and “arrest.”

It is a process of expression.
Just as words name—that is, grasp in its nature and place before us
as a recognizable object what appears in a confused way—the painter, said
Gasquet, “objectifies,” “projects,” and “fixes.”

它是一連串的表達過程。就像文字的功能是用來賦名,用來捕捉以混沌不明的方式呈現給我們的自然,使它安頓在我們面前,變成可理解的對象,所以加斯奎說畫家的職能是「對象化」(objectify)、「具體化」(project)、和「惹人心目」(arrest)。

雄伯译
艺术是表达的过程。正如文字的功能作为命名—也就是说,文字理解以混淆方式出现的东西,根据它的特性,并且将它摆放在我们面前,作为一个可体认的客体—加斯奎说,画家也在「具体表现」,「投射」,「固定」。

Just as words do not resemble
what they designate, a picture is not a trompe l’oeil.

Words do not took like the things they designate; and a picture is not a trompe-l’oeil.
文字看起來一點都不像它們所指涉的事物,一幅畫也不是要用來逼目以亂真。

雄伯
正如文字并没有类似它们指涉的东西,一幅图画也不是视觉陷阱。

Trompe-l’œil (French for “deceive the eye”, pronounced [tʁɔ̃p lœj]) is an art technique that uses realistic imagery to create the optical illusion that the depicted objects exist in three dimensions.

视觉陷阱作为「欺骗眼睛」,是一种艺术技巧,使用写实的意象来创造视觉的幻觉,被描绘的客体存在于三度空间里。

Cezanne, in his own words, “writes in painting what had never yet been painted, and turns it into painting once and for all.”We, forgetting the viscous, equivocal appearances, go through them straight to the things they present.

Cézanne, in his own words, “writes in painting what is not yet painted, and turns it into painting
absolutely.” We forget the viscous, equivocal appearances, and by means
of them we go straight to the things they present.

塞尚自己說:「在繪畫中寫下從沒有被畫過的東西,並使之一勞永逸地轉成繪畫。」忘掉那些黏不拉搭而模稜兩可的表象,我們穿過它們而直接到達它們所呈現的事物。
雄伯译

依照塞尚自己的说法,他「以绘画书写从未被绘画过的东西,并且将它断然地转变成为绘画。」当我们忘记那些胶著而暧昧的各种表象时,我们穿透这些表象,直接到达它们呈现的事物。」

The painter recaptures and converts into visible objects what would, without him, remain walled up in the separate life of each consciousness: the vibration of appearances which is the cradle of things. Only
one emotion is possible for this painter—the feeling of strangeness— and only one lyricism—that of the continual rebirth of existence.

The painter recaptures and converts into visible objects what would, without him, remain
closed up in the separate life of each consciousness: the vibration of appearances
which is the cradle of things. Only one emotion is possible for
this painter—the feeling of strangeness—and only one lyricism—that of
the continual rebirth of existence.

畫家將原本區隔不同之生活意識的高牆打倒,而重新把抓轉化為可見的對象--表象的顫動即是事物的搖籃。這種畫家只可能有一種情緒:陌生感;只可能有一種抒情的主題:存在的不斷重生。

雄伯译
画家重新捕捉作为事物的摇篮的各种表象的悸动,并且将它们转化成为可见的客体。若是没有画家,这些表象的悸动原本将会始终被围隔于每个意识的区隔的生命里。对于画家,仅有一种情感是可能的—奇异感—仅有一种抒情—生命实存的不断重生的抒情。

Identification 47

November 28, 2014

Identification 47
认同

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

17.1.62 VIII 1
Seminar 8: Wednesday 17 January 1962

24.1.62 IX 3

It must be the same for the signifier, and this is what justifies
the definition of the signifier that I give you, its distinction
from the sign: the fact is that if the sign represents something
for someone, the signifier is articulated otherwise, it
represents the subject for another signifier. This you will see
sufficiently confirmed at every step provided you do not let go
of the solid hand-rail. And if it represents the subject in
this way, how is it done?

对于能指,那一定是相同的。这就是我给予你们的能指点定义自园其说的东西。它跟符号的区别:事实上,假如符号对应某人代表某件东西,能指就是被表达不一样。能指代表主体对于另外一个能指。你们将会充分地看出这点在每个步骤都被证实,只要你不要松开坚固的手栏杆。假如它以这种方式代表主体,它是如何做呢?

Let us come back to our starting point, to our sign, to the
elective point at which we can grasp it as representing something
for someone in a trace. Let us start from the track in order to
track down our little affair.

让我们回到我们的开始点,回到我们的符号,回到这个选择点。在那里,我们能够理解它,作为代表某物,对于在痕迹里的某人。让我们从这个痕迹开始,为了追踪我们的小事情。

A footprint, a track, Friday’s footprint on Robinson’s island:
emotion, the heart racing before this trace. All this teaches us
nothing, even if from this racing heart there results a whole lot
of stamping around this trace; this could happen on coming across
(6) any animal tracks but if coming on it unexpectedly I find the
trace of something whose trace someone has tried to efface, or if
even I no longer find the trace of this effort, if I have come
back because I know – I am not any more proud of it because of
that – that I left the trace, that I find that, without any
correlative which allows this effacing to be attached to a
general effacing of the traits of the configuration, one has well
and truly effaced the trace as such, then I am sure that I am
dealing with a real subject.

足印,痕迹,「星期五」在鲁宾孙岛上的足印:情感,在这个痕迹之前的奔驰的心。所有这些没有教导我们什么,即使从这个奔驰的心,结果会有许多的践踏环绕这个痕迹,当他遇见任何动物的痕迹时,会发生这样的事情。但是假如我意料之外地碰见它,我发现某件东西的痕迹,它的痕迹某个人曾经尝试要抹除。或者,即使我不再发现这种努力的痕迹,假如我回来,因为我知道—我没有因为它而以它感到骄傲—我留下这个痕迹,我发现,没有任何对应的东西容许这个抹除跟轮廓的特征的一般性的抹除连接一块。我们确确实实抹除这个痕迹的自身,因此我确定,我们正在处理一位真正的主体。

Notice that, in this disappearance
of the trace, what the subject is trying to make disappear is his
own passage as a subject. The disappearance is redoubled by the
disappearance that is aimed at which is that of the act itself of
making disappear.

请你们注意,在痕迹的这个消失,主体尝试要让它消失的东西,就是他自己作为主体的过程。这个消失是被瞄准的目标的消失的加倍,是让它消失的行为的本身的消失。

24.1.62 IX 4
This is not a bad trait for us to recognise in it the passage of
the subject when it is a question of his relationship to the
signifier, in the measure that you already know that everything
that I am teaching you about the structure of the subject, as we
are trying to articulate it starting from this relationship to
the signifier, converges towards the emergence of these moments
of fading linked properly speaking to this eclipse-like pulsation
of what only appears in order to disappear and reappears in order
to disappear anew, which is the mark of the subject as such.

这并不是坏的特征,让我们在它里面体认出主体的过程,当这是跟能指的关系的过程。随着你们已经知道,每样我教导你们的东西,关于主体的结构,如同我们尝试表达它,从跟能指的关系开始,朝向消隐的这些时刻的出现的汇集,恰当来说,跟仅是表象的这个消蚀般的悸动相关的消隐—为了消失而出现,为了重新消失而重新出现,这就是主体的本身的标记。

Having said this, if the trace is effaced, the subject surrounds
its place with a ring (cerne) something which thenceforward
concerns him; the mapping out of the place where he found the
trace, well then, here you have the birth of the signifier. This
implies a whole process involving the return of the last phase
onto the first, that there cannot be any articulation of a
signifier without these three phases. Once the signifier is
(7) constituted, there are necessarily two others before. A
signifier is a mark, a trace, a writing, but it cannot be read
alone. Two signifiers is a bloomer, a cock-and-bull story.

当我说完这个,假如这个痕迹被抹除,主体环绕它的位置,用一个环圈,某件跟他息息相关的东西。这个位置的描绘,在那里,他找到这个痕迹,呵呵,在此,你们拥有能指的诞生。这暗示着整个的过程,牵涉到最后的部分回到最初的部分。只要有能指点表达,就会有这三个痕迹。一旦痕迹被形成,必然就会有两个其他痕迹在前头。能指是一个标记,痕迹,书写,但是它无法单独被阅读。两个能指是尴尬的错误,公鸡与牛的故事。

Three signifiers is the return of what is involved, namely of the
first. It is when the pas (step) marked in the trace is
transformed in the vocalisation of whoever is reading it into pas
(not) that this pas, on condition that one forgets that it means
the step, can serve at first in what is called the phonetics of
writing, to represent pas, and at the same time to transform the
trace of pas eventually into the pas of the trace.

三个能指就是牵涉的东西的回来,也就是,最先部分的回来。当这个步骤被标记在痕迹里,它被转化。由任何正在将它阅读成为步骤的人的表达,只要我们忘记,它意味着步骤。这个步骤起初充当所谓的书写的语音的东西,为了代表步骤,同时转化步骤的痕迹,最后进入痕迹的步骤。

I think that you can hear in passing the same ambiguity that I
made use of when I spoke to you, in connection with the
witticism, of the pas de sens, playing on the ambiguity of the
word sens (meaning) with this leap, this breakthrough which takes
hold of us us when we start to have fun when we do not know why a
word makes us laugh, this subtle transformation, this rejected
stone which being taken up again becomes the cornerstone (pierre
d’angle), and I would be quite happy to make a play on words with
the TvR of the formula of the circle because moreover it is in it

我想你们能够顺便听见相同的模糊暧昧,当我跟你们言说,我使用的模糊暧昧,关于这个机智语,玩弄字词意义的模糊暧昧,用这个跳跃,掌握我们的这个突破,当我们开始有关美好时刻,当我们不知道为什么一个字词让我们笑起来,这个微妙的转变,这个被正在被从事的拒绝的石头,它成为这个基石。我非常乐意玩弄这些文字,用圆圈的公式的旋转,因为它在它里面。

– I announced it to you the other day in introducing the minus 1
– that we will see that there is measured, as I might say, the
vectorial angle of the subject with respect to the thread of the
signifying chain.

–我前天跟你们宣告它,当我介绍这个负一。
–我们将会看见,我不妨说,主体的向量的这个角度被测量,关于能指化锁链的线索。

It is here that we are suspended and it is here that we should
habituate ourselves a little to displacing ourselves, on a
substitution through which that which has a meaning is
transformed into an equivocation and finds its meaning again.

就在这里,我们被悬置。就在这里,我们应该稍微习惯于替换我们自己,根据一个替换。通过这个替换,具有意义的东西被转化成为模糊暧昧,然后再次找到它的意义。

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

Aion 166

November 27, 2014

Aion 166

永恒纪元

Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格

XI
第六章

THE ALCHEMICAL INTERPRETATION
OF THE FISH

鱼的炼金术解释

256 We find the crucial importance of self-knowledge for the
alchemical process of transformation expressed most clearly in
Dorn, who lived in the second half of the sixteenth century.

我们发现,对于转化的炼金术过程,理解自己至关紧要,这在敦恩身上表现得最为淋漓尽致。他生活在16世纪的后半叶。

The idea itself is much older and goes back to Morienus Romanus
(7th-8th cent.), in the saying which he wrote on the rim of the
Hermetic vessel: “All those who have all things with them have
no need of outside aid.” 46

这个观念本身更加古老,回溯到摩瑞那思 罗马那思(7到8世纪)。在他所书写的辞说,探讨密封船隻的边缘时:「身上拥有这一切的那些人们,他们并不需要外在的帮助。」

He is not referring to the possession
of all the necessary chemical substances; it is far more a moral
matter, as the text makes clear.47 God, says Morienus, made the
World out of four unequal elements and set man as the “greater
ornament” between them: “This thing is extracted from thee,
for thou art its ore; in thee they find it, and, to speak more
plainly, from thee they take it; and when thou hast experienced
this, the love and desire for it will be increased in thee.” 4S

他并不是提到一切必要的化学物质。这更加是道德的问题。如同文本清楚表达。摩瑞那思说:上帝用四个不相等的元素制造世界,并且让人作为它们中间的「更大的装饰」:「这个东西从你们那里抽取出来,因为你们就是它的矿源;在你们身上,他们找到它。更加明确地说,从你们身上,他们拿到它;当你们已经经验到这个时,对于它的欲望将会在你身上增加。」

This “thing” is the lapis, and Morienus says that it contains the four
elements and is likened to the cosmos and its structure. The
procedure for making the stone “cannot be performed with
hands,” 49 for it is a “human attitude” (dispositio hominum).
This alone accomplishes the “changing of the natures.” The
transformation is brought about by the coniunctio, which forms
the essence of the work.50

这个「物象」就是石头,摩瑞那思说:它包括四个元素,并且被比喻为宇宙及它的物质。制造石头的程序,「无法用手执行」。因为那时一种「人性的态度」。光是这个就完成「各种天性的改变」。转化被导致,由这个连接,它形成工作的本质。

257 The “Rosinus ad Sarratantam Episcopum”—which, if not
altogether Arabic in origin, is one of the oldest texts in Arabic
style—cites Magus Philosophus: 51 “This stone is below thee, as
to obedience; above thee, as to dominion; therefore from thee,
as to knowledge; about thee, as to equals.” 52

Rosinus ad Sarratantam Episcopum的起源并不完全是阿拉伯文,它是阿拉伯文的风格的其中最古老的文本—玛格思的哲学引述说:「这个石头在你们之下,作为顺服;在你们之上,作为统辖。因此,从你们那里,作为知识;关于你们,作为相等。」

The passage is
somewhat obscure. Nevertheless, it can be elicited that the stone
stands in an undoubted psychic relationship to man: the adept
can expect obedience from it, but on the other hand the stone
exercises dominion over him. Since the stone is a matter of
“knowledge” or science, it springs from man.

这个段落相当模糊。可是,我们能够引用:石头跟人处于无可置疑的心灵的关系:通灵者能够期望从它期望顺服。但是另外一方面,石头运用统辖他。因为这个石头上「知识」或智慧的物质,它起源于人。

But it is outside
him, in his surroundings, among his “equals,” i.e., those of like
mind. This description fits the paradoxical situation of the self,
as its symbolism shows. It is the smallest of the small, easily overlooked
and pushed aside.

但是它在他的外面,在他的环境里,在他的「相等人」当中,譬如,跟他的心灵相同的人们。这种描述适合自性的悖论情况,如同它的象征显示。那是渺小中的最渺小,容易被忽视与推到一旁。

Indeed, it is in need of help and must
be perceived, protected, and as it were built up by the conscious
mind, just as if it did not exist at all and were called into being
only through man’s care and devotion. As against this, we know
from experience that it had long been there and is older than
the ego, and that it is actually the secret spiritus rector of our
fate.

的确,它需要帮助,并且必须被感知,保护,因为它由意识的建造,正如它根本就没有存在,并且被召唤出现,仅是凭借人的照顾与忠诚。以这个作为背景,我们根据经验知道,它曾经长期在那里,比自我更加古老。那确实是我们的命运的秘密精神。

The self does not become conscious by itself, but has always
been taught, if at all, through a tradition of knowing (the
purusha Iatman teaching, for instance). Since it stands for the
essence of individuation, and individuation is impossible without
a relationship to one’s environment, it is found among those
of like mind with whom individual relations can be established.

自性并没有凭借它自己变得意识。但是总是曾经被教导,凭借认知的传统(譬如,教学)。因为它代表个体化的本质。个体化是不可能的,假如没有跟他的环境的关系。个体化在那些心灵相的人们身上被找到。跟他们,个人的关系能够被建立。

The self, moreover, is an archetype that invariably expresses a
situation within which the ego is contained. Therefore, like
every archetype, the self cannot be localized in an individual
ego-consciousness, but acts like a circumambient atmosphere to
which no definite limits can be set, either in space or in time.
(Hence the synchronistic phenomena so often associated with
activated archetypes.)

而且,自性是一个原型,这个原型一成不变地表达自我被包括的一个情况。因此,像每个原型,自性无法在个人的自我意识里被找出位置。而是行动像一个环境的大气,没有明确的限制能够被建立,不管是空间,或是时间。(因此,共时性的现象,经常跟被激发的原型联想一块。)

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

个人梦的象征 7

November 27, 2014

个人梦的象征 7

Individual Dream Symbolism in Relation to Alchemy : 359
个人的梦的象征跟炼金术的关系

CarlJung
卡尔 荣格

3. The Symbolism of the Mandala
三、曼陀罗的象征

12. Dream:
第十二梦

The dreamer finds himself with his father, mother, and
sister in a very dangerous situation on the platform of a
tram-car.

作梦者发现他自己跟他的父亲,母亲,与妹妹一块,处于非常危险的情况,在电车的月台上。

Once more the dreamer forms a quatcrnity with the
other dream figures. He has fallen right back into childhood,
a time when we are still a long way from wholeness.
Wholeness is represented by the family, and its components
are still projected upon the members of the family and
personified by them.

再一次,作梦者形成一个四分图,具有其他的梦的人物。他直接地掉落回到童年,当我们距离完整性仍旧很远的一段时间。完整性由家庭来代表,家庭的组成成分仍然被投射到家庭的成员上,并由他们具体表现。

But this state is dangerous for the
adult because regressive: it denotes a splitting of personality
which primitive man experiences as the perilous “loss
of soul.” In the break-up the personal components that have
been integrated with such pains are once more sucked into
the outside world.

但是这个状态对于成人是危险的,因为压抑,它指明个格的分裂。原始人们经验人格的分裂,作为是危险的「灵魂的丧失」。在这个分裂里,曾经如此费力融合的个人的组成成分,再次被吸收进入外面的世界。

The individual loses his guilt and exchanges
it for infantile innocence; once more he can blame
the wicked father for this and the unloving mother
that, and all the time he is caught in this inescapable causal
nexus like a fly in a spider’s web, without noticing that he
has lost his moral freedom. 77

个人丧失他的负罪感,并且用它来交换婴孩的纯真。再次,他能够责怪邪恶的父亲,因为这个,责怪母亲,因为那个。始终他被套陷在这个无法逃避的因果的核心,就像是一只苍蝇在蛛蛛网里,没有注意到,他已经丧失他的道德的自由。

But no matter how much
parents and grandparents may have sinned against the
child, the man who is really adult will accept these sins as
his own condition which has to be reckoned with. Only
a fool is interested in other people’s guilt, since he cannot
alter it. The wise man learns only from his own guilt. He
will ask himself: Who am I that all this should happen
to me? To find the answer to this fateful question he will
look into his own heart.

但是无论父母与祖父母会对小孩犯上多大的原罪,确实已经成年的这个人接受这些原罪,作为他自己必须被考虑到的情况。只有傻瓜才会对别人的负罪感感到興趣,因为他无法改变它。智慧的人仅是凭借他自己的负罪感学习。他将询问他自己:我是何许人也,所有这一切竟然发生在我身上。为了找到这个致命的问题的回答,他将探视他自己的内心。

As in the previous dream the vehicle was an airplane, so
in this it is a tram. The type of vehicle in a dream illustrates
the kind of movement or the manner in which the dreamer
moves forward in time—in other words, how he lives his
psychic life, whether individually or collectively, whether
on his own or on borrowed means, whether spontaneously
or mechanically.

如同在先前的梦里,交通工具是飞机,在这个梦里,交通工具是电车。在梦里的交通工具的种类举例说明这种运动,或作梦者在时间里向前进行的方式。换句话说,他如何过他的心灵的生活,无论是个人或集体,无论是靠他自己,或靠借用的工具,无论自动自发,或机械方式。

In the airplane he is flown by an unknown
pilot; i.e., he is borne along on intuitions emanating
from the unconscious. (The mistake is that the “mirror” is
used too much to steer by.) But in this dream he is in a
collective vehicle, a tram, which anybody can ride in; i.e.,
he moves or behaves just like everybody else. All the same
he is again one of four, which means that he is in both
vehicles on account of his unconscious striving for wholeness.

在飞机里,他由一位陌生的驾驶员载着飞行。他靠在从无意识散发出来的直觉,被载前进。(错误的地方是,这个「镜子」太过于经常被使用,无法驾驭。)但是在这个梦里,他处于集体的交通工具,任何人都能够搭乘的电车里。他移动或行为,就像每一位其他的人。仍然地,他再次是四个中的其中一个。那意味着,他处理两种交通工具里,因为他的无意识的追寻完整性。

13. Dream:
第十三个梦

In the sea there lies a treasure. To reach it, he has to
dive through a narrow opening. This is dangerous, but
down below he will find a companion. The dreamer takes
the plunge into the dark and discovers a beautiful garden
in the depths, symmetrically laid out, with a fountain in the
centre.

在海里,宝藏在那里。为了到达它,他必须潜水,穿过一道狭窄的开口。这是危险的,但是在底下,他将会找到有位同伴。作梦者孤注一掷地进入黑暗,然后在深处发现一座美丽的花园,均称地展开,中央有一座喷泉。

The “treasure hard to attain” lies hidden in the ocean of
the unconscious, and only the brave can reach it. I conjecture
that the treasure is also the “companion,” the one
who goes through life at our side—in all probability a close
analogy to the lonely ego who finds a mate in the self, for
at first the self is the strange non-ego.

这个「难于获得的宝藏」隐藏在无意识的大海里。只有勇者才能够到达它。我推测,这个宝藏也是「同伴」,在们旁边经历生命的这个同伴—很有可能地,它可密切类比于在自性里找到同伴的这个孤独的自我。因为起初,自性就是陌生的非-自我。
This is the theme of
the magical travelling companion, of whom I will give three
famous examples: the disciples on the road to Emmaus,
Krishna and Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita, Moses and
El-Khidr in Sura 18 of the Koran.78 I conjecture further
that the treasure in the sea, the companion, and the garden
with the fountain are all one and the same thing: the self.

这就是魔门的旅行的同伴的主题。我将给予三个著名的例子:前往阿冒思温泉的三位门徒,薄伽梵歌里的克丽西拿与阿朱那,可兰经的摩西与基德尔。我更进一步推测:海量的财宝,同伴,与具有喷泉的花园,都是同样的一件东西:自性。

For the garden is another temenos, and the fountain is the
source of “living water” mentioned in John 7 : 38, which
the Moses of the Koran also sought and found, and beside
it El-Khidr,79 “one of Our servants whom We had endowed
with Our grace and wisdom” (Sura 18).

因为花园是另外一个圣地,喷泉是「活生生的水电来源」,在约翰书第7章38节被提到。可兰经的摩西也寻找并且找到这个喷泉。在喷泉旁边,阿基德尔是我们的一位仆人,我们曾经将我们的恩典与智慧秉赋给他们。

And the legend
has it that the ground round about El-Khidr blossomed
with spring flowers, although it was desert. In Islam, the
plan of the temenos with the fountain developed under
the influence of early Christian architecture into the court
of the mosque with the ritual wash-house in the centre
(e.g., Ahmed ibn-Tulun in Cairo).

根据传说,环绕阿-基德尔的土地盛开著春天的花,虽然那沙漠。在回教,具有喷泉的圣地的计划,在早期的基督教的建筑的影响之下发展成为回教寺庙的庭院,在中央有仪式的洗刷屋(请参照开罗的艾哈迈德 伊本 突伦)。

We see much the same
thing in our Western cloisters with the fountain in the
garden. This is also the “rose garden of the philosophers,”
which we know from the treatises on alchemy and from
many beautiful engravings. “The Dweller in the House”
(cf. commentary to dream 10) is the “companion.”

我们看见差不多相同的东西,这么西方的修道院,具有喷泉在花园里。这也是「哲学家的玫瑰园」,我们根据炼金术的论文与许多美丽的雕塑知道。「房屋的居住者」就是「同伴」(请参照第10个梦的注释)。

The centre and the circle, here represented by fountain and
garden, are analogues of the lapis, which is among other
things a living being. In the Rosarium the lapis –
“Protege me, protegam te. Largire mihi ius ineum, ut te
adiuvem” (Protect me and I will protect you. Give me my
due that I may help you).

中央与圈圈,在此由喷泉与花园代表,是石头的类比。除了其他东西,它是一个活生生的生命。在玫瑰园,石头「保护我,我将保护你。请你给我应得的东西,这样我才可以帮助你」。

Here the lapis is nothing less
than a good friend and helper who helps those that help
him, and this points to a compensator) relationship. (1
would call to mind what was said in the commentary to
dream 10, more particularly the Monogenes-/fl/?/5,-self parallel.)

在此,石头实实在在就是好朋友与帮助者,他帮助那些帮助他自己的人。这指向一个补偿的关系。我想要提醒,在梦的注释里所被说的东西,更加特别地,在「独异性-石头-自性」的并列。

The crash to earth thus leads into the depths of the sea,
into the unconscious, and the dreamer reaches the shelter
of the temenos as a protection against the splintering of
personality caused by his regression to childhood. The
situation is rather like that of dream 4 and vision 5 in the
first series, where the magic circle warded off the lure of
the unconscious and its plurality of female forms. (The
dangers of temptation approach Poliphilo in much the same
way at the beginning of his nckyia.)

撞毁到地面因此引导进入海洋的深处,进入无意识,作梦者到达圣地庇护所,作为保护抵抗由于退化到童年所引起的人格的分裂。这个情况相当像第一个系列里,第4个梦与第5个幻象的情况。在那里,魔术圈挡开无意识的诱惑,与它的女性的形式的多重性。(诱惑的危险到泊力费洛的爱的灵魂,正如在他的召魂术的开始。)

The source of life is, like El-Khidr, a good companion,
though it is not without its dangers, as Moses of old found
to his cost, according to the Koran. It is the symbol of the
life force that eternally renews itself and of the clock that
never runs down.

生命的来源就像阿-基德尔,是一个好同伴,虽然它并不是没有它的危险。如同依照可兰经,老年的摩西付出代价才发现。这是生命力量的象征,永恒地更新它自己,也是永远不会慢下来的时钟。、

An uncanonical saying of our Lord runs:
“He who is near unto me is near unto the fire.” 81 Just
as this esoteric Christ is a source of fire—probably not
without reference to the rrvp äd £diov of Heraclitus—so the
alchemical philosophers conceive their aqua nostra to be
ignis (fire). 82

我们的主有一段非经文的说法如下:「靠近进入我的人,就是靠近进入火。」正如奥秘的基督是火的来源—可能有点提到赫拉克利图斯的「模糊暧昧」,炼金术的哲学家构想他们的水上生物是火。

The source means not only the flow of life
but its warmth, indeed its heat, the secret of passion, whose
synonyms are always fiery. 83 The all-dissolving aqua nostra
is an essential ingredient in the production of the lapis.

这个来源不但意味着生命的流动,而且意味着它的温暖,的确是它的热,激情的秘密。它们的同义字总是热情如火。溶解一切都水上生物就是基本的成分,在石头的形成。

But the source is underground and therefore the way lea
underneath: only down below can we find the fiery source
of life. These depths constitute the natural history of man,
his causal link with the world of instinct. Unless this link
be rediscovered no lapis and no self can come into being.

但是这个来源在地下,因此途径通往底下。只有在底下,我们才能够发现生命的这个热情如火的来源。这些深处构成人的自然的历史,他的因果的关联,跟本能的世界。除非这个关联重新被发现,没有石头与没有自性能够产生。

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

Identification 48

November 26, 2014

Identification 48
认同

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

17.1.62 VIII 1
Seminar 8: Wednesday 17 January 1962

24.1.62 IX 2

Let us now take up again our pilgrim’s staff, let us take up
again where we are, where I left you the last time, namely on the
idea that negation, if it is indeed somewhere at the heart of our
problem which is that of the subject, is not already,
immediately, even if one looks at its phenomenology, the simplest
thing to handle. It is in many places, and then it happens all
(3) the time that it slips through your fingers. You saw an
example of it the last time, for a moment in connection with the
“non nullus homo non mendax”, you saw me putting in this non,
taking it out and putting it back again; you see this every day.

让我们现在再次从事朝圣者的行囊,让我们再次探索我们的所在,上次,我留你们在那里。也就是说,探索否定的这个观念:假如它确实是我们的难题的核心的某个地方,那就是主体的难题,否定并不是当下就已经可以处理的简单的事情,即使我们观看它的现象学。在很多地方,因此它始终都发生,它经由你的手指间滑溜。上次,你们看见有关它的例子。有一阵子关系到「没有一个人不说谎」。你们看见我放进这个「没有」,将它拿出来,然后再次将它放回去;你们每天看见这个。

It was pointed out to me in the interval that in the discourses
of the one that someone, in a note, my poor dear friend
Merleau-Ponty, called the Great Man who governs us, in a
discourse that the aforesaid great man pronounced one hears “on
ne peut pas ne pas croire que les choses se passeront sans maF
(one cannot not think that things will happen without harm). The
exegesis on this: what does he mean? The interesting thing, is
not so much what he means, it is that obviously we understand
very well precisely what he means and that if we analyse it
logically we see that he is saying the opposite.

在这期间,有人跟我指出:在这个一的这些词说里,某个人,请注意,我亲爱的朋友,梅洛 庞蒂,称统治我们的这位伟人,在一个词说里,上述被宣告的伟人,我们听见「我们无法认为,事情将会发生,没有伤害」。对于这点的紧急状况是:他是什么意思?有趣的事是,并不是他是什么意思。显而易见地,我们确实清楚地理解他是什么意思,假如我们逻辑地分析它,我们看见,他正在说相反的事情。

This is a very pretty formula which you ceaselessly slips into
when you say to someone “vous n’etes pas sans ignorer” (you
cannot fail to be ignorant of [to realise]). It is not you who
are wrong, it is the relationship of the subject to the signifier
which emerges from time to time. It is not simply tiny
paradoxes, slips, that I am pinpointing here in passing. We will
rediscover these formulae at the appropriate bend in the road.

这是一个你们不停地滑落进入的非常美丽的公式,当你们对某个人说,「你们一定是无知,为了体会它。并不你们是错误的。这是主体跟能指的关系,有时出现。这不仅是小小的悖论,失误,我在此顺便指出。我们将会重新发现这些公式,在道路的合宜的转弯处。

And I think I am giving you the key to why “you cannot fail to
realise”, only means what you mean. In order that you may find
your bearings here, I can tell you that it is indeed by exploring
it that we will find the proper weight, the proper incline of
this balance on which I place before you the relationship of the
neurotic to the phallic object when I tell you in order to catch
this relationship, one must say: “il n’est pas sans 1’avoir” (he
is not without having it). This obviously does not mean that he
has it. If he had it, the question would not arise.

我认为我正在给予你们解答,关于为什么「你们一定会体会到」,它仅是意味着你们的意思。为了让你们发现你们在此的关联,我能够告诉你们,确实是凭借探索它,我们将会发现这个适当的重量,这个平衡的适当的倾斜,在你们面前,我放置神经症者的关系,在它上面,跟阳具的客体的关系,当我告诉你们,为了捕捉这个关系,我们必须说:「他并不是没有拥有它」。这显而易见地,并不是意味着:他拥有它。假如他拥有它,这个问题将不会产生。

(4) In order to get there, let us begin from a little reminder
about the phenomenology of our neurotic concerning the point that
we are at in it: his relationship to the signifier. For the
last number of times I have begun to make you grasp the sort of
writing, of original writing there is in the business of the
signifier. It must really have all the same occurred to you
that it is with this that the obsessed subject is dealing all the
time: ungeschen machen, to undo something. What does that mean,
what does that involve?

为了到达那里,让我们从一个小小的提醒开始,关于我们的神经症者的现象学,关于我们在它里面所处的这个点:他跟能指的关系。过去好几次来,我曾经开始让你们理解这种的书写,在能指的事情里,存在的原初的书写。它一定曾经发生在你们身上。用这个书写,被著魔的主体始终正在处理:解开某件东西。那是什么意思,那会牵涉到什么?

Obviously, it can be seen in his behaviour: what he wants to
abolish is what the annalist writes throughout his history, the
annalist – with two n’s – that he has in himself. It is the
annals of the affair that he would like to efface, to scratch
out, to abolish. From what angle does Lady Macbeth’s discourse
reach us when she tells us that all the waters of the sea would
not wash away this little spot if not through some echo which
guides us to the heart of our subject?

显而易见地,在他的行为,我们能够看见:他想要废除的东西,是年表作者在他的历史里所书写的东西,这位年表作者annalist—字母里有两个n,在他自己身上,他拥有的年表。就是这个事物的年表,他想要抹除,擦掉,废除掉。马克白夫人的辞说从什么角度到达我们,当她告诉我们,即使是所有的海水都冲洗不了这个小小的血污。这难道不是某种的迴响引导我们来到主体的核心?

Only the point is, in
washing away the signifier, since it is clear that this is what
is involved – in his way of behaving, in his way of effacing, in
his way of scratching out what is written, what is much less
clear to us, because we know a little bit more about it than the
others, is what he is trying to obtain by doing that.

只是这个时刻是,当她冲走掉这个能指,因为显而易见地,这是所被牵涉的东西—在他行为方式,在他的抹除方式,在他的擦掉所被书写的东西的方式,我们比较不清楚的东西,因为我们比起别人稍微更加知道关于它,那就是,他凭借做那件事,他尝试要获得的东西。

This is why it is instructive to continue along the road that we are on,
where I am leading you as regards how a signifier as such comes
about. If this has such a relationship with the foundations of
the subject, if no other subject is thinkable than this natural
something, x, in as much as it is marked by the signifier, there
must all the same be some source or other for that. We are not
going to content ourselves with this sort of blindfolded truth.

这是为什么这具有启发性,继续沿着我们前进的道路前进,我正在引导你们的道路,关于一个能指的本身是如何发生。假如这跟主体的基础有这样的关系,假如每有其他的主体可以思维,除了这个自然的某件东西未知数x。因为它同样由能指来标示,一定存在着某个来源给那个。我们并不是要满足于这种懵住眼睛的真理。

(5) It is quite clear that we must find the subject at the origin
of the signifier itself; “in order to pull a rabbit out of a
hat”, this is how I began to spread scandal in my properly
analytic remarks: the poor dear man who is now dead and who was
so touching in his fragility, was literally exasperated by this
reminder which I so persistently gave – because at that time it
was a useful formula – that “in order to pull a rabbit out of a
hat you must have put it in beforehand”.

显而易见地,我们必须找到这个主体,在能指它自身的起源,为了「从帽子里掏出一只兔子」。这就是我如何开始丑闻,用我恰如其分的谈论:这位可怜的亲爱的人,他现在死了,他以前的弱不禁风是如此的感人,他对我如此坚持给予的这句提醒的话实质上非常愤怒。因为在那个时刻,那是一个有用的公式—为了从帽子里掏出一只兔子,你们必须事先在帽子里摆放它。

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