Identification 271

Identification 271
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

27.6.62 XXVI 12

I will pass over the steps which go by way of this “while perched
on his shoulders the word it and the word I began their carnage”,
to the confrontation that I was aiming at in evoking this passage
for you:


“His hands tried to touch an impalpable and unreal body. It
was such a horrible effort that this thing which drew away
from him and in drawing away tried to attract him, appeared
to him the same as the one that got unspeakably closer. He
fell to the ground. He had the feeling of being covered
with impurities, each part of his body underwent an agony,
his face was forced to touch evil, his lungs to breathe it.


He was there on the floor, twisting himself, then entering
into himself, then emerging. He crawled heavily scarcely
different from the serpent that he would have wished to
become in order to believe in the venom that he felt in his
mouth. It was in this state that he felt himself bitten or
struck, he could not know which, by what seemed to him to be
a word but which resembled rather a gigantic rat, with
piercing eyes, with pure teeth, an all-powerful
beast. Seeing it a few inches from his face he could not
escape from the desire to devour it, to draw it into the
most profound intimacy with himself; he threw himself on it
and digging his nails into its entrails, he tried to make it
his own.


(14) The end of the night came. The light which shone
through the shutters was extinguished. But the struggle
with the terrible beast, which had finally revealed itself
to be of an incomprehensible dignity and magnificence lasted
for an immeasurable time. This struggle was horrible
for the being lying on the floor grinding his teeth,
furrowing his face, tearing out his eyes in order to get the
animal to enter, and who would have looked like a demon if
he had not resembled a man. It was almost too beautiful
for this sort of black angel, covered with red hairs,
with sparkling eyes.


Sometimes one believed he had triumphed and he saw
descending into himself with an ungovernable nausea, the
word innocence defiling him; sometimes the other devoured
him in his turn, dragged him back through the hole through
which it had come, then rejected him like a hard and empty


On every occasion, Thomas was repulsed to the very
foundations of his being by the very words which had haunted
him and which he had pursued like his nightmare and like the
explanation of his nightmare. He discovered himself still
more empty and more heavy, he no longer stirred except with
an infinite fatigue. His body, after such a struggle became
entirely opaque and to those who regarded it, he gave the
restful impression of sleep even though he had been
ceaselessly awake.”


You can read the rest yourselves.


27.6.353 XXVI 13
And the path of what Maurice Blanchot uncovers for us does not
stop there. If I took the trouble here to indicate this passage
to you, it is because as the time comes for me to leave you this
year I want to tell you that I am often aware of doing nothing
here other than allowing you to advance with me to the point that
all around us many of the best people have already got to.
Other people have noted the parallel between some of the
researchs that are being carried on at present and the ones that
we are elaborating here together. I would have no trouble
reminding you that on other paths, the works and then the
reflections on the works by himself of Pierre Klossowski converge
with this path of research into phantasy as we have elaborated it
(15) this year.

莫瑞斯 布朗肖替我们挖掘出的东西的途径,并没有停顿那里。假如我们在此费这个力3气来跟你们指出这个段落,那是因为我今年离开你们的时刻来到。我想要告诉你们,我经常知道,在此我所做的事情实实在在就是让你们能够跟我一块到达这个时刻:在我们周遭,许多最好的人们已经到达的时刻。其他的人们已经注意到这个并列,处于一些目前正在被执行的研究,我们正在这里一块建构的研究。我并不费力气地提醒你们,对于其他的途经,这些著作,还有皮尔 克罗索斯基自己对于这些著作的反思。它们跟研究幻见的这个途经不谋而合,如同我们今年曾经建构它。

Small i of small o and small o, their difference, their
complementarity and the mask that one constitutes for the other,
this is where I have led you this year. Small i of small o, its
image, is therefore not its image, it does not represent it, this
object of castration. It is not in any way this representative
of the drive on which repression is brought to bear electively.
And for a double reason: the fact is that it is not, this image,
either the Vorstellung because it is itself an object, a real
image – consult what I wrote on this subject in my observations
on the report of Daniel Lagache, – nor an object which is not the
same as small o, which is not its representative either. i(o)
and o.

小客体(o)的小魅影理想自我(i), 与小客体(o),它们的差异,它们的互相辅助,其中一个替另外一个形成的这个面具。这就是我今年引导你们的东西。小客体(o)的小魅影理想自我(i),它的意象,因此并不是它的意象。它根本就不是这个冲动的这个代表,压抑被迫选择地跟这个冲动有关联。因为双重的理由:事实上,并不是这个意象,既不是这个理型,因为它的自身是一个客体,一个真实的意象。请你们参照一下我书写过针对这个主题的东西,在我观察丹尼尔 拉加奇的报告。它也不是一个跟小客体(o)不同的客体,它也不是它的代表,i(o)与(o)。

Desire, you must not forget, is situated where in the graph? It
aims at the phantasy $ barred cut of little o, in a mode
analogous to that of e where the ego refers itself to the
specular image. What does that mean, if not that there is some
relationship of this phantasy to the desirer himself. $4 o


But can we make of this desirer purely and simply the agent of
desire? Let us not forget that at the second stage of the graph
d, desire is a “who” who responds to a question, which is not
aimed at a “who”, but a “Che vuoi?”.


To the question: “Che vuoi?” the desirer is the response, the response which is not designated by the who of “who wants?”, but the response of the
object. What I want in the phantasy determines the object from
which the desirer that it contains must avow himself as desirer.


Look for him always, this desirer, at the core of any object of
desire, and do not put up necrophilic perversion as an objection
because precisely this is the example where it is proved that on
this side of (en-deca) the second death physical death still
leaves something to be desired and that the body allows itself be
grasped there as entirely caught up in the function of the
signifier, separated from itself and a witness to what the
necrophilic embraces: an ungraspable truth.


This relationship of the object to the signifier, before leaving
you, let us come back to the point that these reflections are
based on, namely to what Freud himself marked about the
identification of desire (in parentheses in the case of the
hysteric) to the desire of the Other. The hysteric shows us
clearly in effect the distance between this object and the
signifier, this distance which I defined by the lack of the
signifier but implying its relation to the signifier. In effect,
it is to this that the hysteric identifies herself when, Freud
tells us, it is the desire of the Other with regard to which she
orientates herself and which started her hunting.



Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: