Identification 128

Identification 128
认同

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

11.4.62 XVII 211

When one of my obsessionals, quite recently again after having
developed all the subtlety of the science of his exercises with
respect to feminine objects to whom, as is common among other
obsessionals, he remains attached, as I might say, by what one
can call a constant infidelity: at once the impossibility of
leaving any of these objects and the extreme difficulty of
(12) maintaining them all together, and that he adds that it is
quite clear that in this relationship, in this so complicated
relationship which requires this high degree of technical
subtlety, as I might say, in the maintaining of relationships
which in principle must remain outside one another, impermeable
as one might say to one another and nevertheless linked, that, if
all of this, he tells me, has no other purpose than to leave him
intact for a satisfaction which he himself here comes to grief
on, it must therefore be found elsewhere, not just simply in a
future that is always put off, but manifestly in another space
since as regards this intactness and its purpose he is incapable
when all is said and done of saying at what this could end up in
terms of satisfaction.

当我的一位妄想症者,显示他的运用的科学的微妙后,关于女性的客体。他始终保持连系,这是其他的妄想症者所共通的,跟我们所谓的不断地不忠实:一方面不可能离开任何的这些客体,另一方面,又遭遇极端的困难,要将它们维持在一块。他补充说:显而易见,在这个关系,在这个如此复杂的关系,要求这个高程度的技术的微妙,不妨这样说。用来维持这些关系。原则上,这些关系必是始终互相保持在外面,不妨说说,彼此无法互相弥漫。可是,又联结一块。他告诉我,假如所有这一切没有其他目的,除了让他保持完整作为满足,他自己对这样的满足,感到痛苦。因此,它必须在别的地方被找到,而不仅是在未来被找到。未来总是被拖延,但是明显是在另外一个空间。因为关于这个完整与其目的,当一切都说都做了,他无法说,用满足的术语,他结果能够做些什么?

We have all the same here in a tangible way, something which can
pose for us the question of the structure of desire in the most
day-to-day fashion.

在此用具体的方式,我们仍然拥有某件东西。这个东西能够替我们提出欲望的结构的这个问题,以最日常的方式。

Let us come back to our torus and let us inscribe on it our
Eulerian circles. This is going to necessitate – I apologise for
it – a tiny little twist which is not, even though it might
appear so to someone who comes into my seminar today for the
first time, a geometrical twist – it will be that perhaps right
at the end but very incidentally – which is properly speaking
topological. There is no need for this torus to be a regular
torus nor a torus on which we could make measurements. It is a
surface constituted according to certain fundamental
relationships that I am going to be led to remind you of, but
because I do not want to appear to go too far from what is the
field of our interest I am going to limit myself to things that I
have already initiated and which are very simple.

让我们回到我们的圆环面,让我们在圆环面上面铭记我们的尤勒圆圈。这将是有必要的—我对此抱歉—有必要从事小小的改变。对于今天首次前来我的研讨班的某个人—这个改变并不是几何图形的改变,虽然看起来是这样。或许就在结束的地方,但是非常偶然地,恰当来说,那是拓扑图形的改变。没有必要让这个圆环面成为是规律的圆环面,也不需要成为是我们能够用来测量的圆环面。这个表面的形成,依照某些的基本的关系,我将要被引导提醒你们,但是因为我并不想要显得太过分离开我们感到興趣的领域,我将要限制我自己,仅是探讨我已经开启的东西,那些东西非常简单。

As I pointed out to you: on a surface like this, we can describe
this type of circle which is the one that I have already connoted
(13) for you as reducible, one which if it is represented by a
little string which passes at the
end through a buckle, I can by
pulling on the string reduce to a
point, in other words to zero. I
pointed out to you that there are
two other kinds of circle or loop
whatever size they may be because
for example this one here could
just as well have that shape there:

如同我跟你们指出,在一个像这样的表面,我们能够描述这种圆圈。那就是我已经跟你们指明作为可化简的圆圈。假如它用一个小环圈来代表,这个小环圈在通过环扣的末端通透。我能够凭借拉扯这个环圈,将它化简成为一个点。换句话说,将它化简成为零。我跟你们指出,有两个其他种类的圆圈,或圈套,无论它们是什么大小。因为譬如,这个环圈能够同样用有那里的那个形状:

(1)
That means a circle which goes through the hole whatever may be
its more or less tight more or less loose shape. This is what
defines it: it goes through the hole it passes to the other side
of the hole. It is represented here in dots while the 2 is
represented in full.

这意味着一个圆圈,这个圆圈穿过这个空洞,无论它的形状是相当紧或相当鬆。这就是定义它的东西:它穿过它经过的这个空洞,到达空洞的另外一边。它在此被代表,用这些小点,当这个“2”完整地代表。

This is what that symbolises: this circle
is not reducible, which means that if you suppose it to be
realised by a string still passing through this little arch which
would allow us to tighten it we cannot reduce it to something
like a point; whatever its circumference may be, there will
always remain at the centre, the circumference of what one could
call here the thickness of the torus.

这就是那个象征的东西:这个圆圈并不是可以化简的。那意味着,假如你们认为它被一个环圈说实践,这一个环圈依旧通过这个小拱门。这个拱门将让我们能够锁紧它,我们无法将它化简成为像一个点的某件东西。无论它的圆周有多少,这个圆周将始终在中央,我们在此所谓的圆环面对厚度的圆周。

If from the point of view
which interested us earlier, namely the definition of an inside
and an outside, this irreducible circle shows from one side a
particular resistance, something which with respect to other
circles confers on it an eminent dignity, on this other point
here suddenly it is going to appear singularly deprived of the
properties of the preceding one; because if you materialise this
circle that I am talking to you about for example by a cut with a
pair of scissors, what will you obtain?

假如从早先让我们感到興趣的这个观点。换句话说,内部与外部的定义,这个无法化简单圆圈从一边显示特殊的抗拒,关于其体的圆圈,某件东西在它身上给予一个显著的尊严。在这个另外的点,在此,突然地,它将独异地看起来被剥夺先前的那个圆环面的这些属性。因为假如你们将这个圆圈当成物质,譬如,我正在跟你们谈论的这个圆圈,使用一把剪刀作为切割。你们将获得什么?

Absolutely not, as in
the other case, a little piece which disappears and then the
remainder of the torus. The torus will remain entirely intact in
the form of a pipe or of a sleeve if you wish.

绝对不是一小块,如同在另外的一个情况。这一小块消失,然后剩余的圆环面也消失。这个圆环面将始终保持完整,用管子或袖子的形状,随你们高兴。

If you take on the other hand another type of circle, the one
that I already spoke to you about, the one which does not go
through the hole, but goes around it, this one finds itself in
the same situation as the preceding one as regards
irreducibility.

在另一方面,假如你们採用另外一种圆圈,我已经跟你们谈论过的圆圈,这个圆圈并没有穿过这个空洞,而是绕过这个空洞。这个圆圈发现它自己处在相同的情况,跟先前的圆圈相同的情况,关于无法被化简。

It also finds itself in the same situation as
the preceding one as regards the fact that it is not sufficient
to define an inside or an outside. In other words that if you
follow this circle and if you open the torus with the help of a
pair of scissors, you will finally get what?

它也发现它自己处于相同的情况,跟先前的那个圆圈,关于这个事实:光是将它定义为内部或外部是不足够的。换句话说,假如你们遵循这个圆圈,假如你们打开这个圆环面,凭借一把剪刀的帮忙,你们将会获得什么?

Well, the same
thing as in the preceding case: this has the shape of a torus but
it is a shape which presents only an intuitive difference, which
is altogether essentially the same from the point of view of
(14) structure. You always have after this operation, as in the
first case, a sleeve, simply it is a very short and a very wide
sleeve, you have a belt if you wish but there is no essential
difference between a belt and a sleeve from the topological point
of view, again you can call it a strip if you wish.

呵呵,相同的东西,如同在先前的情况,这个圆圈拥有圆环面的形状。但是这一个形状呈现的仅是直觉的差异。这个直觉的差异基本上完全是相同,从结构的观点。在这个运作之后,你们总是拥有一个袖子,如同在第一个情况。因为它是非常短,而且非常宽的袖子。你们拥有一个腰带,不妨这样说,但是这并没有基本的差别,在腰带与袖子之间,从拓扑图形的观点。而且,你们也可以称它为长条带子。

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

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: