Identification 210

Identification 210
认同

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

2.5.62 XVIII 241
The idea, for example, of any kind of antinomy whatsoever between
word and affect, even though it may be empirically verified in
experience, is nevertheless not something on which we can
articulate a dialectic, if what I am trying to do before you has
a value, namely allows you to develop as far as possible all the
consequences of the effect that man is an animal condemned to
dwell in language. Hence, we cannot in any way hold affect to be
anything whatsoever without ending up in some sort of primariness
(primarite). No significant affect, none of those we have to
deal with from anxiety to anger and all the others, can even
begin to be understood except within a reference in which the
relationship of x to the signifier is primary.

譬如,文字与情感之间的任何种类的对立的这个观念,即使在经验上可以实证验证。可是,这个观念并不是某件我们能够表达作为辩证的东西。假如我正在你们面前尝试做的东西具有价值,换句话说,让你们能够尽可能地发展这个影响的所有的结果,人作为注定驻居于语言的动物的这个影响的所有的结果。因此,我们无法以任何方式将情感认为是任何可以避免某种原初性的东西。从焦虑到愤怒,以及所有的其他情感,我们必须处理的,甚至没有一样能够开始被理解,除了在一个指称里。在这个指称里,未知数x跟能指的关系是原初性。

Before emphasizing the distortions, I mean that with respect to certain
breakthroughs which would be the next stage, I want of course to
mark the positive aspect of what was already permitted to her by
the simple usage of these terms in the forefront of which are
those which she made use of with correctness and skill: desire
and demand. It is not enough to have heard about this which – if
one makes use of them in a certain fashion, but they are not all
the same such esoteric words that anyone feels that they cannot
use them – it is not enough to use these terms: desire and
demand, in order to apply them correctly. Certain people have
tried it recently and I am not sure that the result was in any
way either brilliant – which after all would only be of secondary
importance – or even had the slightest relationship with the
function that we give to these terms.

在我强调这些扭曲之前,我的意思是,关于某种的突破,那将是下一阶段,我当然想要标示她已经被容许的东西的这个积极的面向,凭据对于这些术语的简单的使用。这些术语的最前端就是她正确而巧妙地利用的这些术语:欲望与要求。光是曾经听过这个术语并不足够。假如我们利用它们,用某种的方式。但是它们仍然并不是如此奥秘的文字,以致于任何人都会感觉到,他们无法使用它们:欲望与要求,为了正确地运用它们。最近某些人们曾经尝试这样做,我并不确定,结果是否辉煌。毕竟,这仅是次要。或是跟我们给予这些术语的功能,具有丝毫的关系。

This is not the case for Mme Aulagnier, but something that
allowed her to attain at certain moments a tone which manifested
a sort of conquest, even if only in the form of the question
posed. The handling of these terms allows us to designate the
first very impressive opening that she gave us. I would point
out to you what she said about orgasm or more exactly about
loving jouissance.

这并不是奥拉尼尔的情况。但是某件东西让她能够获得,在某个时刻获得展现某种征服的语调。即使採用的形式上提出问题。对于这些术语的处理,让我们能够指明,她给予我们的最初的印象深刻的开放。我将跟你们指出,她所说的东西,关于高潮,或更加贴切地是,关于爱的欢爽。

If I may be allowed to address myself to her as Socrates might
address himself to some …….. I would say to her that she
proves that she knows what she is talking about. That she does
it as a woman, this is what traditionally seems to be
self-evident. I am less sure about it: rare are the women, I
would say, whatever about knowing, who are able to talk while
knowing what they are saying about the things of love. Socrates
(23) said that undoubtedly he could bear witness to that himself,
that he knew.

假如我被容许跟她谈论,如同苏格拉底跟某个门徒谈论、、、我想要对她说:她证明她知道她正在谈论什么。作为女人,她这样做,这是传统上看起来是自明的。我对这件事情并没有那样确定。这样的女人是罕见的,我不妨说,关于知识,能够谈论而又知道她们正在谈论什么的女人,关于爱情的事情。苏格拉底说,无可置疑地,他自己能够见证到那件事情,他知道。

The women are therefore rare, but you should
clearly understand what I mean by that: the men are even more so.
As Mme Aulagnier told us, in connection with what loving
jouissance is, in rejecting once and for all this famous
reference to fusion which should alert us who have given a quite
archaic sense to this term fusion, you cannot at the same time
require that it is at the end of a process that one arrives at a
moment that is qualified as unique, and at the same time suppose
that it is by a return to some primitive differentiation or
other.

这些女人因此是罕见的。但是你们应该清楚地理解我讲那句话的意思:这样的男人甚至更加罕见。如同奥拉尼尔女士告诉我们,关于爱情的欢爽是什么,当我们一劳永逸地拒绝这个著名的指称,“结合”的这个指称。它应该提醒我们,因为我们曾经给予相当过时的意义,给予“结合”这个术语。你们无法同时地要求,就是我们到达的这个过程的结束时,在被要求做为独特性的特质的时刻。而同时又认为,这是凭借回转到某个原始的差异。

In short, I will not reread her text because I do not
have the time, but on the whole I do not think it would be
unprofitable for this text, to which I am certainly far from
giving a mark of 100 percent, I mean of considering as a perfect
discourse, to be considered rather as a discourse defining a rung
starting from which we could situate the progress to which we
could refer ourselves, to something which was touched on or in
any case perfectly grasped, caught, circumscribed, understood by
Mme Aulagnier.

总之,我将不会重新阅读她的文本,因为我也没有那个时间。但是大体上,我并不认为对于这个文本,那将是无利可图。我确实没有要给予它百分之一百的分数。我指的是,我没有认为它是一个完美的辞说。相反地,它应该被认为是定义阶梯的辞说。从这个阶梯开始,我们能够定位这个进展,我们自己能够参与的进展。提到某件被探讨的东西,或是完美地被奥拉尼尔女士掌握,被捕捉,被描述,被理解的东西。

Of course, I am not saying that she is giving us her last word
here, I would even say more: on several occasions she indicates
the points where it would seem necessary to her to advance to
complete what she is saying and of course a great part of my
satisfaction comes from the points that she indicates. They are
precisely the very ones which could be turned round, as I might

当然,我并不是说,她将在此给予我们最后的论断。我甚至要说:在好几个场合,她指出这几点。在那里,她似乎有必要前进来完成她正在说的东西。当然,我大部分的满意来自于她指示的这几点。它们确实是能够被翻转的几点。

She designates these two points in connection with the
relationship of the psychotic to his own body on the one hand –
she said that she had many things to say, she indicated a little
bit of it to us – and on the other hand in connection with the
phantasy where the obscurity in which she left it would appear to
me sufficiently indicative of the fact that this darkness is
rather general in groups. This is one point.

她指们这两点,一方面,关于精神病跟他自己的身体的关系—她说,她拥有很多话要说。她跟我们稍微指出一些。在另一方面,关于幻想,我觉得,她将它留置于模糊当中。这个模糊充分地指示这个事实:这个黑暗在团体里是相当普遍的。这是一点。

2.5.62 XVIII 242

The second point that I find very remarkable in what she
contributed to us, is what she contributed when she spoke to us
about the perverse relationship. Not of course that I subscribe
at every point to what she said on this subject, which is really
of an unbelievable daring.

在她贡献给予我们的内容,我发现值得注意到第二点是,她所贡献的东西,当她跟我们谈论关于这个倒错的关系。当然,倒不是我每一点都同意她所说的东西,关于这个主题。那确实是匪夷所思地大胆。

It is to congratulate her highly for
having been in a position, even if it is a step to be rectified,
to do it all the same; to describe this step as I should, I would
say that it is the first time, not simply in my circle – and I am
delighted that someone has preceded me in this – that something
has come to the fore, a certain fashion, a certain tone in
speaking about the perverse relationship which suggests to us the
idea which is properly speaking the one that has prevented me
(24) from speaking about it up to now because I do not want to
appear to be the one who says: everything that has been done up
to the present isn’t worth buttons.

那是要高度地恭贺她,因为她曾经处于这个立场,即使这是应该被改进的一个步骤,她仍然有立场可以这样做。描述这个步骤,如同我应该描述的。我将说,这是第一次,不仅是在我的圈子里,我很高兴,某个人在我之前发现,某件东西已经呈现出来,以某种的方式,某种的语调,当她谈论倒错的关系。这个倒错的关系跟我们暗示这个观念。贴切地说,这个观念曾经阻碍我迄今无法谈了它,因为我并不想要成为这样说的人:迄今所被谈论的东西都一文不值。

But Mme Aulagnier, who has
not the same reasons for modesty as I have, and moreover who says
it in all innocence, I mean who has seen perverts and who has
interested herself in them in a truly analytic fashion, begins to
articulate something which, from the very fact of being able to
present under this general form, I repeat, an unbelievably
audacious one that the pervert is someone who makes himself
object for the jouissance of a phallus whose ownership
(appartenance) he does not suspect: he is the instrument of the
jouissance of a god.

但是奥拉尼尔女士并没有跟我相同的理由,要如此谦虚。而且,她非常纯真地说出它。我的意思是,她曾经看见过倒错,她对倒错者非常感到興趣,以非常精神分析的方式。她开始表达某件东西,根据这个事实,她能够呈现它,在这个普遍的形式之下。我重复一下,这个东西是匪夷所思地大胆:倒错者是某个将他自己当著是阳具的欢爽的客体的这个人。倒错者并没有怀疑他拥有阳具:他是某个神的欢爽的工具。

That means when all is said and done, that
this deserves some sharpening, some rectification by directive
maneouvres and, in a word, that this poses the question of
reintegrating what we call the phallus, that this poses the
urgency of the definition of phallus – there is no doubt about it
– since that surely has the effect of telling us that if a
diagnosis of perverse structure ought, for us analysts, to have a
meaning, we must begin by throwing out the window everything that
was written from Kraft-Ebing to Havelock Ellis and everything
that has been written in any supposedly clinical catalogue
whatsoever of the perversions. In short, there is to be overcome

那意味着,当一切被说被做了,这个工具应该稍微磨得更加锐利,凭借指导的运作稍微修正。总之,这形成这个问题,将我们所谓的阳具的东西重新融合。这形成定义阳具的这个迫切性—关于它,这是无可置疑的。因为这确实是具有这个影响,告诉我们,假如倒错症的结构的一个诊断,就我们精神分析家而言,应该具有一个意义,我们必须开始,将每样曾经被写过的东西抛出窗外,自从克拉特-阿宾到哈比勒克,每样被写过的东西,有关倒错症的被认为是临床的目录的东西。总之,这应该被克服。

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: