Archive for the ‘拉康论移情’ Category

拉康论移情 0322e

September 22, 2011

拉康论移情 0322e

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研讨班第八册

Transference 论移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根据未编辑的法语录音英译

Seminar 15:Wednesday 22 March 1961

In others words, that there is one of these objects that he encounters, and which is the paternal phallus already encountered with the first phantasies of the subject, Melanie Klein tells us, at the origin of the fandum, he must speak, he is going to speak.

换句话说, 他遭遇的这些客体,属于父亲的阳具,在生命主体的首先幻见里已经被遭遇。梅兰妮,克莱恩告诉我们, 在运动迷的起源, 他必须言说, 他将要言说。

Already in the inner empire, in this interior of the body of the mother where there are projected the first imaginary formations, something is perceived which distinguishes itself as more specially accentuated, even dangerous: the paternal phallus.

已经在这个内在的帝国,在母亲的身体的内部, 最初的想象的形成被投射,某件东西被感觉。这个东西区别它自己,作为特别地强调,甚至是危险的:父亲的阳具。

On the field of the desire of the Other, the subjective object already encounters identifiable occupants at whose ell, as I might say, at whose rate he has already to value himself and to weigh himself, and pose these differently modelled little weights which are in use in primitive tribes of Africa where you see a little twisted-up animal, or even indeed some phalloform object as such.

在大它者的欲望的领域,主观性1客体已经遭遇可辨认的佔据者,我不妨说,在他们的侧边, 以他们的速率,他已经必须评估他自己,衡量他自己, 然后提出这些不同模式的小重量。这种小重量在非洲的原始部落正在被使用,在那里,你们看到这个小的捲曲的动物,或甚至确实就是像阳具般的客体本身。

(6) At this phantastical level therefore, the privilege of the image of the mantis is uniquely the fact – which is not after all so certain – that the mantis is supposed to eat her males one after another, and that this passage to the plural is the essential dimension through which it takes on for us a phantastical value.

因此,在这个阳具的层次,螳螂的意象的特权,独特性就是这个事实—畢竟,它并没有那么确定—螳螂被认为要吃掉她的雄性伴侣,一个又一个地。这个由单数到复数的过程是基本的向度,通过这个向度,对于我们,它具有幻见到价值。

Here then there is defined this oral phase. It is only within the demand that the Other is constituted as the reflection of the hunger of the subject.

在此, 这个口腔的部分被定义。 仅是在这个要求之内,大它者被组成,作为生命主体的饥饿的反思。

The Other therefore is not at all simply hunger, but articulated hunger, hunger which demands. And the subject by this is open to becoming object, but, as I might say, of a hunger which chooses.

因此,大它者根本不是仅是饥饿,而是被表达的饥饿,要求的饥饿。作为这样的生命主体, 很容易渐渐成为客体, 但是,我不妨说, 成为具有选择能力的饥饿的客体。

The transition is made from hunger to eroticism along the path of what I called above a preference.

从饥饿转移到性爱, 沿着我以上所谓的偏爱的途径。

She likes something, that especially, in what one might call a
gluttonous way…. here we find ourselves reintroduced into the
register of original sins. The subject has placed himself on
the a la carte menu of cannibalism which everyone knows is never
absent from any communion phantasy.

她喜爱某件东西, 特别地, 在我们所谓的一个饕餮的方式,,,在此,我们发现我们自己重新被介绍进入原罪的铭记。 生命主体已经将自己摆放在食人肉的欲望。众所周知, 在领圣餐幻见里总是出现的欲望。

Read this author whom I speak to you about throughout the years
returning in a sort of periodical way, Baltasar Gracian.

请阅读我这几年来跟你们谈论的这位作者, 我周期地会回头谈论他,巴塔萨,格瑞西恩。

Obviously only those of you who understand Spanish will be able
to find in it, unless they have it translated, their complete
satisfaction. Translated very early, as people translated at
the time, almost instantaneously throughout Europe – all the same
some things remain untranslated.

显而易见的,你们当中,仅有了解西班牙语的那些人,才能够在里面找到他们完整的满足,除非他们让它被翻译。它很早就被翻译, 如同当时的翻译, 在欧洲到处同时被翻译—可是有些东西始终没有被翻译。

It is a treatise about communion, el Comulgatorio, which is a good text in this sense there is revealed there something which is rarely admitted, the pleasures of consuming the Corpus Christi, the body of Christ,
are detailed there.

那是关于领圣餐的论文,el Comulgatorio,这是一篇很好的论文,某件东西以这个意义被显示,分食耶稣基督的身体的狂乐,在那里被详述。

And we are asked to dwell on this exquisite cheek, on this delicious arm, I will spare you the rest in which spiritual concupiscence is satisfied, lingers on, revealing to us in this way what always remains implied in even the most elaborated forms of oral identification.

我们被要求详述这个精致的脸颊, 这个美味的手臂, 其余的我就不跟你们一一枚举了。在里面,精神的强烈欲望被满足, 被流连,以这种方式跟我们显示,始终被暗涵的东西, 甚至在最复杂的口腔认同的形式。

In opposition to this thematic in which you see there being deployed by the virtue of the signifier in a whole field already created to be inhabited secondarily, the most original tendency, it is really in opposition to this that the last time I wanted to show you a meaning of the anal demand ordinarily little or badly articulated, by showing you that it is characterised by a complete reversal of the initiative for the benefit of the other.

跟这个主题相提并论的,你们看出, 能指的优点被运作,在已经被创造的整个领域, 成为其次被驻居的地方, 最原初的倾向。它确实跟这个相提并论, 上一次,我想要跟你们显示一种肛门要求的意义。一般来说,这个意义几乎没有被表达,或表达得很糟糕。 它跟你们显示,它的特征是完全倒转大它者的利益的创议。

It is properly here that there lies – namely at a stage not so
obviously advanced or certain in our normative ideology – the source of the discipline – I have not said the duty – the discipline, as people say, of cleanliness (proprete*) in which the French tongue so nicely marks the oscillation with proprietorship (propriete), with that which properly belongs, education, good manners as I might say. Here the demand is exterior, and at the level of the other, and is posed, articulated as such.

适当地就是在这里, 纪律的来源就在这里—也就是说, 在我们作为规范的意识形态,并没有那么高级或确定的阶段—我还没有说到责任—如人们所说的, 乾净的纪律。在这里,法文档语言如此巧妙地标示所有权的摇摆,带着适当归属的东西, 如教育,好的礼节,我不妨这么说。在此,要求是外在的, 在大它者的层次, 以这种方式被提出,被表达。

The strange thing is that we have to see and recognise here, in what has always been said and which it seems no one has really dealt with, that here there properly comes to birth the gift-object as such, and that what the subject can give in this metaphor is exactly linked to what he can retain, namely his own waste, his excrement.

这个奇怪的事情是,我们在此必须看见及体认,在总是被说的东西。似乎没有人真的处理过它。在此, 这个礼物的客体本身被诞生。生命主体以这种比喻能够给予的东西, 确实是跟他能够保留的东西息息相关。也就是说, 他自己的废物,他的粪便。

It is impossible not to see something exemplary, something which it is properly speaking indispensable to designate as the radical point at which there is decided the projection of the desire of the subject into the other.

我们不可能不看出某件作为典范的东西, 某件东西,适当来说, 是不可免除的,为了要指明作为这个积极点。在这个积极点, 生命主体的欲望的被决定要投射进入大它者。

There is a point of the phase at which desire is articulated and is constituted, at which the other is properly speaking its rubbish dump.

在部分有一点, 欲望被表达,被形成,在这一点,大它者适当地说,是它的垃圾的倾倒。

And one is not surprised to see that the idealists of the theme of a
“hominisation” of the cosmos – or as they are forced to express it in our day, of the planet…. one of the phases of the (7) “hominisation” of the planet, is that the man-animal makes of it properly speaking a refuse dump, a rubbish dump.

我们并不惊讶,当我们看到,宇宙的「人类化」的主题的理念主义者—或是在我们的时代,当他们被迫表达它,行星的人类化,,,行星的人类化的其中一个部分是,作为动物的人解释它作为废物倾倒,垃圾倾倒,适当来说。

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

拉康論移情 0322d

September 22, 2011

拉康論移情 0322d

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研討班第八冊

Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 15:Wednesday 22 March 1961

The exemplary character therefore of the image that is proposed
to us only begins at the precise point that we have no right to
go to, namely that this devouring of the cephalic extremity of
the partner by the praying mantis is something which is marked by
the fact that this is accomplished by the mandibles of the female
partner which participate as such in the properties which constitute, in living nature, the cephalic extremity, namely a certain collection of the individual tendency as such, namely the possibility in some register that it exercises a discernment, a choice.

因此,我們被建議的這個意象作為典範的特性,僅是從這個我們沒有權利前往的確實點開始。換句話說, 伴侶的頭部被匍匐的螳螂的極端的這個吞噬,是某件被這個事實標示,由女性伴侶的下顎所完成。 女性的伴侶的本身參與組成的屬性, 在具體的自然界, 這個頭部的極端。 換句話說, 個人傾向的某種收集, 換句話說,在某種的銘記,它運作一種覺察,一種選擇的可能。

In other words, the praying mantis likes the head of her partner better than anything else, there is here a preference, malle, mavult, that is what she likes.

換句話說, 匍匐的螳螂喜歡她的伴侶的頭,更甚過於任何其它東西。 在此,有一個偏好, 那就是她喜歡什麼。

And it is in so far as she likes that that for us, in the image, she shows
herself as enjoying (jouissant) at the expense of the other, and in a word, that we begin to put into natural functions what is in question, namely some moral sense, in other words, that we enter into the Sadian dialectic as such.

因為她喜歡那個, 就我們而言, 在這個意象,她顯示她自己,作為享受歡爽,以大它者作為代價。 總之, 我們開始將受到質疑的東西,放進自然的功用。也就是說, 某種道德的意義, 換句話說, 我們進入薩德虐待狂辯證法的本身。

This preference for jouissance to any reference to the other is revealed as the dimension of essential polarity in nature.

對於歡爽的偏愛大它者的任何指稱, 被顯示作為自然界基本的兩極化的維度。

It is only too clear that it is we who contribute this moral sense, but that we contribute it in the measure that we discover the meaning of desire as this relationship to something which, in the other, chooses this partial object.

這僅是顯而易見的, 我們貢獻這個道德的意義。但是我們貢獻它,隨著我們發現欲望的這個意義, 作為跟某件東西的關係。 這個東西選擇大它者身上的這個部分客體。

Here again let us pay a little more attention. Is this example fully valid as a way of illustrating for us this preference for the part rather than the whole, precisely illustratable in the erotic value of the extremity of the nipple of which I spoke above?

在此,再一次,讓我們稍微注意一下。這個例子,作為跟我們說明,對於部分客體,而不是全部客體的方法,充分有效嗎?在我以上談論的乳房的極端的性愛價值,確實可以說明嗎?

I am not so sure, in so far as it is less, in this image of the praying
mantis, the part which would be preferred to the whole in the most horrible fashion allowing us already to short-circuit the function of metonomy, than rather the whole which is preferred to the part.

我並沒有那麼確定,因為在匍匐螳螂的這個意象,並不是這個部分客體受到喜愛,勝過於全部客體, 以最為可怕的方式,容許我們已經能夠中斷換喻的這個功用。而不是全部客體被喜愛,勝過於部分客體。

Let us not in effect omit that, even in an animal structure so
distant from us in appearance as that of the insect, the value of
concentration, of reflection, of totality represented somewhere
in the cephalic extremity undoubtedly functions and, that in any
case, in phantasy, in the image which attracts us, there operates
with its particular accentuation this acephalisation of the
partner as it is presented to us here.

讓我們實際上不要遺漏,甚至外表上跟我們如此遙遠的動物的結構, 如昆蟲的動物結構。專注的價值, 反思的價值, 在某個地方被代表的完整性的價值, 無可置疑地,在頭部的極端性發揮功用。 無論如何,在幻見裡,在吸引我們的這個意象裡, 以它的特別的強調, 運作這個伴侶的頭部,當它在此呈現給予我們。

And, in a word, the value of the praying mantis as a fable (the one which underlies what it represents effectively in a certain mythology or simply a folklore) in everything that Caillois put the accent on under the
(5) register of the myth and the sacred, which is his first work…. it does not appear that he sufficiently highlighted that we are here in poetry, in something whose accent does not depend simply on a reference to the relationship to the oral object as it is delineated in the koine of the unconscious, the common tongue, but in something more accentuated, in something which designates for us a certain link of acephalousness with the transmission of life as such.

總之,匍匐螳螂的價值, 作為一種寓言, ( 這個寓言強調,它有效地代表,在某種的神話裡,或僅是一種民間傳說), 在凱洛伊斯強調的一切,在神話與神聖的銘記,這是他的第一部著作,,,他似乎並沒有充分強調,我們在此是在詩裡, 在某件東西的強調點,並不僅是依靠提到跟口腔客體的關係, 如同它在無意識的普通語被描述的, 這個普遍的語言, 而是在某件更加被強調的東西, 在某件跟我們指明某種頭部的關聯,由於生命本身的傳遞。

In designating the fact that there is, in this passing of the flame from one individual to another, in a signified eternity of the species, that the telos is not passed on by the head, this is what gives to the image of the mantis its tragic sense which, as you see, has nothing to do with the preference for what is called an oral object which, does not on any occasion, in human phantasy in any case, refer to the head.

當我們指明這個事實, 從一位個人到另外一位個人, 激情的傳遞,在品種的被指示的永恆裡, 這個激情並不是根據頭部傳送。這就是為什麼螳螂的這個意象被給予它的悲劇意義。 你們看出, 這個悲劇意義跟偏愛所謂的口腔客體,絲毫沒有任何關係。 在任何場合,在人類的幻見, 無論如何, 這個所謂的口腔客體,並沒有提到頭。

It is something quite different that is in question in the liaison with the oral phase of human desire.

這是某件受到質疑的完全不同的東西, 在跟人類欲望的口腔的部分聯繫。

That which is outlined as a reciprocal identification of the subject to the object of oral desire, is something which is on the way – experience shows it to us immediately – to a constitutive fragmentation, to these fragmentary images which were recently evoked during our journées provinciales as being linked to some primitive terror or other which seemed, I do not know why for the authors, to take on some value as a disturbing designation, even though it is indeed the most fundamental, the most widespread, the most common phantasy at the origin of all the relationships of man to his somatic existence.

所被描繪輪廓的東西, 作為生命主體的一種互惠的認同口腔欲望的客體, 是某件在途中的東西—精神分析經驗立刻跟我們顯示它—認同一種構成的碎片化,認同這些碎片的意象。這些意象最近被召喚,在我們地方化,作為跟某種原始的恐懼有關聯,。我不知道為什麼,對於作者們, 這些恐懼似乎具有某種價值, 充當一種令人困擾的指稱, 即使它確實是最基本,最廣泛,最普遍的幻見, 在人跟他的身體的存在的所有關係的起源。

The fragments from the anatomy building which people the celebrated image of St. George de Carpaccio in the little church of Sainte-Marie-des-Anges in Venice are indeed that which, I believe, with or without analysis, never fail to present themselves at the level of the dream in every individual experience, and moreover in this register, the head which walks around all by itself continues very well, as in Cazotte, to tell its little stories.

在威尼斯,在聖瑪麗小教堂裡,存放的聖喬治,卡帕西奧德著名意象。我相信,無論有沒有精神分析,教堂拆解的碎片確實一定會呈現它們本身,在夢的層次, 在每位元個人的存在。而且,在這個銘記,單獨到處走動的這個頭, 繼續不斷地述說它的小故事, 如同在卡哲特的雜誌。

This is not what is important. And the discovery of analysis, is that the subject, in the field of the Other, encounters not simply the images of his own fragmentation but, already from the beginning, the objects of the desire of the Other, namely of the mother, not just in their fragmented state but with the privileges that the desire of the mother accords them.

這確實並不是重要的地方。精神分析的發現是;生命主體, 在大它者的領域, 不僅邂逅他自己碎片化的意象, 而且,從一開始, 就邂逅到大它者欲望的這些客體。換句話說, 母親的客體, 不僅是在它們具有特權的碎片化的狀態,母親的欲望給予它們這些特權。

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

拉康論移情 0322c

September 22, 2011

拉康論移情 0322c

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研討班第八冊

Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 15:Wednesday 22 March 1961

And after all we do not know anything about it, the praying
mantis is perhaps, as Descartes did not hesitate to say, a pure
and simple machine – a machine, in his language, which precisely
supposes the elimination of all subjectivity.

畢竟,關於它,我們一切不懂的東西,這個匍匐的螳螂,或許,如笛卡爾毫不猶豫地1, 一個純粹簡單的機器—一部機器,使用他的語言, 確實地假定所有生命主體化的抹除。

We have no need, for our part, to limit ourselves to these minimal positions, we grant it this jouissance ……….. this jouissance, this is the next stop, is it a jouissance of something in so far as it
destroys it? Because it is only starting from there that it can
indicate for us the intentions of nature.

就我們而言,我們沒有需要限制我們自己在這些微小的立場,我們給予它這個歡爽,,,這個歡爽,這是下一個停頓。當它毀滅它時, 這是一個某件東西的歡爽嗎?因為只有從那裡開始, 它才能跟們指示自然界的這些意圖。

(3) In order to highlight immediately what is essential, in order
that it should be for us some sort of model of what is in question, namely oral cannibalism, or primordial eroticism, I designate this right away, it is necessary properly speaking that we should imagine here this jouissance correlative to the decapitation of the partner which it is supposed in some degree to recognise as such.

為了立刻強調什麼是重要的,為了讓它對於我們形成某種受到質疑的模式,換句話說, 口腔的食人肉,或原始的性愛,我立刻指明這個。適當地說, 我們在此應該想像這個歡爽,跟伴侶的斬首互相對應。在某個程度上,它被認為是要這樣體認。

I do not disdain this because in truth it is animal ethology which for us is the major reference for maintaining this dimension of knowing that all the progress of our knowledge nevertheless renders for us, in the human world, so vascillating as to be identified properly speaking to the
dimension of miscognition, of Verkennung as Freud says; a simple remark, the observation elsewhere in the field of living things of this imaginary Erkennung, of this privilege of the counterpart which goes so far in certain species as to reveal itself for us in its organogenic effects.

我並不藐視這個,因為事實上,這是動物行為學。對於我們而言, 動物行為學生主要的指稱,用來維持這個知道的維度;在人類的世界,我們知識的所有進展,對於我們而言,使它成為如此的搖擺,以致於被辨認為,適當來說,就是誤認的維度,如佛洛伊德所說的,「誤識」。這是一個簡單的談論,這個在別處的觀察,在這個想像的「真實界」,在這個相對之物的特權的具體事物的領域。在某些的品種,它甚至跟我們顯示它自己,在它的器官起源的影響。

I will not return to this old example around which I oriented for you my exploration of the imaginary at the time when I was beginning to articulate
something of what is coming, after years, to maturity – to maturity before you, my doctrine of analysis – the female pigeon in so far as she does not reach completion as a pigeon except by seeing her pigeon image for which a little mirror in the cage may suffice, and also the cricket who does not go through his stages unless he has encountered another cricket.

我將不會回到這個古老的例子,環繞它,我跟你們定位我對於想像界的探索,在我正在開始表達某件東西, 幾年以後,會漸漸成熟的東西—在你們面前會成熟的東西,我的精神分析的信條—女性的鴿子,當她沒有到達完整,作為一隻鴿子,除了就是看到她的鴿子的意象。在籠子裡一面小鏡子就足以證明。而且,這隻蟋蟀並沒有經歷它的各個階段,除非他曾經邂逅到另外一隻蟋蟀。

There is no doubt that not only in what fascinates us, but in
what fascinates the male of the praying mantis, there is this
erection of a fascinating form, this deployment, this attitude
from which for us it draws its name, the praying mantis, it is
singularly from this position (not of course without opening the
way for us to some vacillating reversal or other) which presents
itself to our eyes as that of prayer.

無可置疑,不但在迷住我們的東西,而且在迷住匍匐螳螂的男性,就是這種迷人形式的這個豎立,這個部署,這隻匍匐的螳螂, 獨特地從這個立場 (當然,並非沒有我們展開某種搖擺倒轉的方式),它呈現在我們眼前,作為祈禱者的立場。

We notice that it is before this phantasy, this incarnated phantasy, that the male yields, that he is taken, summoned, aspirated, captivated in the
embrace which for him is going to be fatal.

我們注意到, 就在這個幻見面前, 這個具體化的幻見, 這個男性的屈服, 他在這個擁抱裡被接納,召喚, 呵氣,著迷。對於他而言, 這種擁抱將會是致命的。

It is clear that the image of the imaginary other as such is here
present in the phenomenon, that it is not excessive to suppose
that something is revealed here about this image of the other.

顯而易見,這個想像界的大它者本身的意象,在這個現象這裡被呈現, 我們這樣假定並不算過分:某件東西在這裡被顯示, 關於這個大它者的意象。

But does it mean for all that that there is already some préfiguration, a sort of inverse blue-print of what would therefore be presented in man as a sort of remainder, of sequel, of defined possibility of variations in the operation of natural tendencies?

但是儘管這樣,它難道意味著,已經有某種的徵兆,某種倒轉的藍圖,因此被呈現在人身上, 作為某種的剩餘物, 某種的餘波,某種被定義的變化的可能性, 在自然的傾向的運作。

And if we ought to accord some value to this properly speaking monstrous example, we cannot all the same do other than remark the difference to what is presented in human phantasy (that from which we can begin with certainty from the subject, there alone where we are assured of it, namely in so far as it is the support of the signifying chain), we cannot
therefore fail to remark that in what nature presents us with there is, from the act to its excess, to that which overflows and accompanies it, to this devouring surplus which signals it for us as the example of another instinctual structure, the fact is that there is synchrony here: the fact is that it is at the moment of the act that there is exercised this complement exemplifying for us the paradoxical form of instinct.

假如我們應該給予某種的價值,適當地說,給予這個怪誕的例子, 我們仍然別無它法,除了就是標示這個差異,對於在人類的幻見被呈現的東西 ( 我們能夠確定地從生命主體開始的東西,僅有在那裡, 我們確定它,換句話說, 它是能指化鎖鏈的支持), 我們因此一定會談論到, 在自然界呈現給我們的東西, 從行為到它個過度, 到滿溢及伴隨它的東西,到這個吞噬的剩餘。它跟我們指示著,作為另外一種本能結構的剩餘的例子。事實上, 在此有個同步: 事實上, 在這個行動的時刻, 這個互補被運作, 跟我們舉例,本能的矛盾的形式。

Henceforward, is there not outlined here a limit which allows us to define strictly the way in which what is exemplified is of service to us, but is only of service to us in order to give us the form of what we mean when
we talk about a desire.

因此, 這裡難道不是描繪出一種限制, 容許我們嚴格定義這個方式。以這種方式, 它對我們有幫助,但是僅是對我們有幫助,為了要給予我們這個形式,當我們談論到欲望,這是什麼意思。

If we talk about the jouissance of this other who is the praying (4) mantis, if it interests us on this occasion, it is because, either it enjoys (jouit) there where the male organ is, and also it enjoys elsewhere, but wherever it enjoys – something we will never know anything about, but it does not matter – that it should enjoy elsewhere only takes on its meaning from the fact that it enjoys – or it does not enjoy, it does not matter –
there. Let her enjoy where she likes, this has no meaning, in the value that this image takes on, except from the relationship to a there of virtual enjoying.

假如我們談論這個大它者的歡爽,這個大它者就是這隻匍匐的螳螂,假如它在這個場合感到興趣,那是因為,它要就是很享受歡爽, 在男性器官的所在,而且它在別的地方也享受歡爽,但是在任何它享受歡爽的地方—有某件東西,我們將永遠不知道, 但是這沒有關係—要不就是它並沒有在那裡享受歡爽, 這也沒有關係—讓她在她喜歡的地方享受歡爽, 這沒有什麼意義, 在這個意象具有價值的地方,除了根據這層關係,跟虛擬享受到一個「它方」。

But when all is said and done in synchrony (whatever may be in question), it will never after all be, even in a deviant way, anything but a copulatory
jouissance.

但是在同時性,當一切都說都做了, (不管受到質疑的是什麼), 它永遠不會是別的, 即使是以偏離的方式, 除了就是一種性交媾的歡爽。

I mean that, in the infinite diversity of instinctual mechanisms in nature, we can easily discover all the possible forms, including the one in which the organ of copulation is lost in loco in the consummation itself.

我的意思是, 在自然界的這個本能的機械結構的無限多樣性,我們能夠很容易發現所有可能的形式, 包括這個形式, 性交媾的的器官迷失在高潮的錯亂裡。

We can moreover consider that the act of devouring is there one of the
numerous forms of the bonus which is given to the individual partner of copulation in so far as it is ordered to its specific end in order to keep him in the act which it is a question of allowing.

而且,我們能夠認為, 吞噬的行動在那裡,是其中一種無數的額外利益。這個額外利益給予性交媾的個別伴侶,當它被規範得钜細無遺,為了保持他自己在這個行動,問題是要容許它與否。

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

 

拉康论移情 0322b

September 21, 2011

拉康论移情 0322b

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研讨班第八册

Transference 论移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根据未编辑的法语录音英译

Seminar 15:Wednesday 22 March 1961

And after all we do not know anything about it, the praying
mantis is perhaps, as Descartes did not hesitate to say, a pure
and simple machine – a machine, in his language, which precisely
supposes the elimination of all subjectivity.

畢竟,关于它,我们一切不懂的东西,这个匍匐的螳螂,或许,如笛卡尔毫不犹豫地1, 一个纯粹简单的机器—一部机器,使用他的语言, 确实地假定所有生命主体化的抹除。

We have no need, for our part, to limit ourselves to these minimal positions, we grant it this jouissance ……….. this jouissance, this is the next stop, is it a jouissance of something in so far as it
destroys it? Because it is only starting from there that it can
indicate for us the intentions of nature.

就我们而言,我们没有需要限制我们自己在这些微小的立场,我们给予它这个欢爽,,,这个欢爽,这是下一个停顿。当它毁灭它时, 这是一个某件东西的欢爽吗?因为只有从那里开始, 它才能跟们指示自然界的这些意图。

(3) In order to highlight immediately what is essential, in order
that it should be for us some sort of model of what is in question, namely oral cannibalism, or primordial eroticism, I designate this right away, it is necessary properly speaking that we should imagine here this jouissance correlative to the decapitation of the partner which it is supposed in some degree to recognise as such.

为了立刻强调什么是重要的,为了让它对于我们形成某种受到质疑的模式,换句话说, 口腔的食人肉,或原始的性爱,我立刻指明这个。适当地说, 我们在此应该想象这个欢爽,跟伴侣的斩首互相对应。在某个程度上,它被认为是要这样体认。

I do not disdain this because in truth it is animal ethology which for us is the major reference for maintaining this dimension of knowing that all the progress of our knowledge nevertheless renders for us, in the human world, so vascillating as to be identified properly speaking to the
dimension of miscognition, of Verkennung as Freud says; a simple remark, the observation elsewhere in the field of living things of this imaginary Erkennung, of this privilege of the counterpart which goes so far in certain species as to reveal itself for us in its organogenic effects.

我并不藐视这个,因为事实上,这是动物行为学。对于我们而言, 动物行为学生主要的指称,用来维持这个知道的维度;在人类的世界,我们知识的所有进展,对于我们而言,使它成为如此的摇摆,以致于被辨认为,适当来说,就是误认的维度,如佛洛伊德所说的,「误识」。这是一个简单的谈论,这个在别处的观察,在这个想象的「真实界」,在这个相对之物的特权的具体事物的领域。在某些的品种,它甚至跟我们显示它自己,在它的器官起源的影响。

I will not return to this old example around which I oriented for you my exploration of the imaginary at the time when I was beginning to articulate
something of what is coming, after years, to maturity – to maturity before you, my doctrine of analysis – the female pigeon in so far as she does not reach completion as a pigeon except by seeing her pigeon image for which a little mirror in the cage may suffice, and also the cricket who does not go through his stages unless he has encountered another cricket.

我将不会回到这个古老的例子,环绕它,我跟你们定位我对于想象界的探索,在我正在开始表达某件东西, 几年以后,会渐渐成熟的东西—在你们面前会成熟的东西,我的精神分析的信条—女性的鸽子,当她没有到达完整,作为一隻鸽子,除了就是看到她的鸽子的意象。在笼子里一面小镜子就足以证明。而且,这隻蟋蟀并没有经历它的各个阶段,除非他曾经邂逅到另外一隻蟋蟀。

There is no doubt that not only in what fascinates us, but in
what fascinates the male of the praying mantis, there is this
erection of a fascinating form, this deployment, this attitude
from which for us it draws its name, the praying mantis, it is
singularly from this position (not of course without opening the
way for us to some vacillating reversal or other) which presents
itself to our eyes as that of prayer.

无可置疑,不但在迷住我们的东西,而且在迷住匍匐螳螂的男性,就是这种迷人形式的这个竖立,这个部署,这隻匍匐的螳螂, 独特地从这个立场 (当然,并非没有我们展开某种摇摆倒转的方式),它呈现在我们眼前,作为祈祷者的立场。

We notice that it is before this phantasy, this incarnated phantasy, that the male yields, that he is taken, summoned, aspirated, captivated in the
embrace which for him is going to be fatal.

我们注意到, 就在这个幻见面前, 这个具体化的幻见, 这个男性的屈服, 他在这个拥抱里被接纳,召唤, 呵气,著迷。对于他而言, 这种拥抱将会是致命的。

It is clear that the image of the imaginary other as such is here
present in the phenomenon, that it is not excessive to suppose
that something is revealed here about this image of the other.

显而易见,这个想象界的大它者本身的意象,在这个现象这里被呈现, 我们这样假定并不算过分:某件东西在这里被显示, 关于这个大它者的意象。

But does it mean for all that that there is already some préfiguration, a sort of inverse blue-print of what would therefore be presented in man as a sort of remainder, of sequel, of defined possibility of variations in the operation of natural tendencies?

但是尽管这样,它难道意味着,已经有某种的征兆,某种倒转的蓝图,因此被呈现在人身上, 作为某种的剩余物, 某种的馀波,某种被定义的变化的可能性, 在自然的倾向的运作。

And if we ought to accord some value to this properly speaking monstrous example, we cannot all the same do other than remark the difference to what is presented in human phantasy (that from which we can begin with certainty from the subject, there alone where we are assured of it, namely in so far as it is the support of the signifying chain), we cannot
therefore fail to remark that in what nature presents us with there is, from the act to its excess, to that which overflows and accompanies it, to this devouring surplus which signals it for us as the example of another instinctual structure, the fact is that there is synchrony here: the fact is that it is at the moment of the act that there is exercised this complement exemplifying for us the paradoxical form of instinct.

假如我们应该给予某种的价值,适当地说,给予这个怪诞的例子, 我们仍然别无它法,除了就是标示这个差异,对于在人类的幻见被呈现的东西 ( 我们能够确定地从生命主体开始的东西,仅有在那里, 我们确定它,换句话说, 它是能指化锁链的支持), 我们因此一定会谈论到, 在自然界呈现给我们的东西, 从行为到它个过度, 到满溢及伴随它的东西,到这个吞噬的剩余。它跟我们指示著,作为另外一种本能结构的剩余的例子。事实上, 在此有个同步: 事实上, 在这个行动的时刻, 这个互补被运作, 跟我们举例,本能的矛盾的形式。

Henceforward, is there not outlined here a limit which allows us to define strictly the way in which what is exemplified is of service to us, but is only of service to us in order to give us the form of what we mean when
we talk about a desire.

因此, 这里难道不是描绘出一种限制, 容许我们严格定义这个方式。以这种方式, 它对我们有帮助,但是仅是对我们有帮助,为了要给予我们这个形式,当我们谈论到欲望,这是什么意思。

If we talk about the jouissance of this other who is the praying (4) mantis, if it interests us on this occasion, it is because, either it enjoys (jouit) there where the male organ is, and also it enjoys elsewhere, but wherever it enjoys – something we will never know anything about, but it does not matter – that it should enjoy elsewhere only takes on its meaning from the fact that it enjoys – or it does not enjoy, it does not matter –
there. Let her enjoy where she likes, this has no meaning, in the value that this image takes on, except from the relationship to a there of virtual enjoying.

假如我们谈论这个大它者的欢爽,这个大它者就是这隻匍匐的螳螂,假如它在这个场合感到興趣,那是因为,它要就是很享受欢爽, 在男性器官的所在,而且它在别的地方也享受欢爽,但是在任何它享受欢爽的地方—有某件东西,我们将永远不知道, 但是这没有关系—要不就是它并没有在那里享受欢爽, 这也没有关系—让她在她喜欢的地方享受欢爽, 这没有什么意义, 在这个意象具有价值的地方,除了根据这层关系,跟虚拟享受到一个「它方」。

But when all is said and done in synchrony (whatever may be in question), it will never after all be, even in a deviant way, anything but a copulatory
jouissance.

但是在同时性,当一切都说都做了, (不管受到质疑的是什么), 它永远不会是别的, 即使是以偏离的方式, 除了就是一种性交媾的欢爽。

I mean that, in the infinite diversity of instinctual mechanisms in nature, we can easily discover all the possible forms, including the one in which the organ of copulation is lost in loco in the consummation itself.

我的意思是, 在自然界的这个本能的机械结构的无限多样性,我们能够很容易发现所有可能的形式, 包括这个形式, 性交媾的的器官迷失在高潮的错乱里。

We can moreover consider that the act of devouring is there one of the
numerous forms of the bonus which is given to the individual partner of copulation in so far as it is ordered to its specific end in order to keep him in the act which it is a question of allowing.

而且,我们能够认为, 吞噬的行动在那里,是其中一种无数的额外利益。这个额外利益给予性交媾的个别伴侣,当它被规范得钜细无遗,为了保持他自己在这个行动,问题是要容许它与否。

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

拉康論移情 0322

September 20, 2011

拉康論移情 0322

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研討班第八冊

Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 15:Wednesday 22 March 1961

We are again going to wander, I feel inclined to say, through the
labyrinth of the position of desire. A certain returning to, a
certain labouring of the subject, a certain Durcharbeitung, as
they say, appears necessary to me – I already indicated this the
last time and indicated why – for an exact positioning of the
function of transference.

我們再一次將要漫遊,我想要說, 通過欲望的位置的迷宮。 生命主體的某種的回轉, 某種辛苦的操作,某種的「鍛鍊」,如人們所說,我覺得是必要—上一次我已經指示這個, 並且指示為什麼—對於移情的功用的一個確實的立場。

This is why I will come back today to underline the meaning of what I told you the last time by bringing you back to the examination of what are called the phases of the migration of the libido in the erogenous zones.

這是為什麼我今天將會回頭強調,上一次我告訴你們的的意義,當我帶你們回頭審察所謂的性感地帶的力比多的遷移的部分。

It is very important to see the measure in which the naturalist view implied in this definition is resolved, is articulated in our way of enunciating it in so far as it is centred on the relationship of demand and of desire.

重要的是要看出,在這個定義暗含的自然主義的觀點,被解決的程度。它用我們表達的方式表達, 它被集中在要求的關係,及欲望的關係。

From the beginning of this journey I have stressed that desire
preserves, maintains its place in the margin of demand as such;
that it is this margin of demand which constitutes its locus;
that, to highlight what I mean here, it is in a beyond and a
hither in this double hollow which is already delineated once the
cry of hunger passes to the stage of being articulated; that at
the other extreme we see that the object which is called the
nipple in English, the tip of the breast, the mamelon, takes on
at the term of human eroticism its value as agalma, as marvel, as
precious object becoming the support of this pleasurable
sensation, of this pleasure of a nibbling in which there is
perpetuated what we can truly call a sublimated voracity in so
far as it takes this Lust, this pleasure and moreover these
Lüste, these desires (you know the equivocation that the German
term preserves in itself which is expressed in this sliding of
signification produced by the passage from the singular to the
plural) therefore this oral object takes its pleasure and its
desires, its covetousness, from elsewhere.

從探討的這個旅途開始,我曾經強調,欲望保存及維持它的位置,在要求本身的邊緣。就是這個要求的邊緣,組成它的軌跡。 為了強調我在此的意思, 在這個雙重空洞的超越那邊及這邊, 它已經被描述,一旦饑餓的呼喊越過被表達的階段。在另外一個極端,我們看到,在英文所謂的乳頭的客體,乳房的尖端, 在人類性愛的術語, 具有它的價值, 作為貢品,作為神奇, 作為珍貴的客體, 變成為快樂感覺的支持, 乳頭的快樂。在此,我們真實所謂的昇華的貪婪,成為永恆,因為他接受這個「欲念」,這個快樂,而且,這些「欲念」,這些欲望 ( 你們知道,德文的術語「保存」本身的模棱兩可。這個術語被表達, 在從獨特性到繁複性產生的意義的這個滑溜,)因此,這個口腔的客體,獲得它的快樂及它的欲望,它的垂涎,從別的地方。

This is why, by an inversion of the usage of the term sublimation, I have the right to say that here we see this deviation as regards the goal in the inverse direction to the object of a need. In effect, it is not from primitive hunger that the erotic value of this privileged object here takes its substance, the eros which dwells in it comes nachtraglich,
by retroaction and only in a deferred manner, and it is in the oral demand that the place of this desire has been hollowed out.

這是為什麼昇華這個術語的用法的倒轉, 我用權利說, 在此我們看到這個偏離, 關於需要的客體的相反方向的這個目標。實際上, 並不是從原始的饑餓,這個具有特權的客體的性愛的價值,在此獲得它的物質, 這個棲居在裡面的性愛,以反動而拖延的方式過來。就是在這個口腔的要求, 這個欲望的位置曾經被掏空。

(2) If the demand with the beyond of love that it projects did
not exist, there would not be this place hither, of desire, which
constitutes itself around a privileged object.

假如它所投射到帶有愛的超越的要求並不存在, 就不會有欲望的這邊這個位置。這個欲望組成它自己,環繞一個特權的客體。

The oral phase of sexual libido requires this place hollowed out by demand.
It is important to see whether the fact of presenting things in this way does not involve some specification which one could brand as being too partial. Should we not take literally what Freud presents to us in one or other of his enunciations as the pure and simple migration of an organic, mucous erogeneity as I might call it; and moreover could one not say that I am neglecting natural facts, namely for example instinctual, devouring motions which we find in nature linked to the sexual cycle (cats eating their young); and moreover the great phantastical figure of the praying mantis which haunts the analytical amphitheatre is presented there as a mother-image, as a matrix of the function attributed to what is so boldly, perhaps after all so inappropriately, called the castrating mother.

性的力比多的口腔的部分要求這個位置被要求掏空。 重要的是要看出,是否以這種方式呈現這個事實,並沒有牽涉某些明確的東西,我們能夠標誌為太過於部分。我們難道不應該實質上接納,佛洛伊德在他的一篇表達呈現給我們,我所謂的器官粘液的性愛的單純遷移?而且, 我們難道不能說,我正在忽略自然的事實?換句話說,譬如,本能的,吞噬的動作, 我們在自然界發現的, 跟性的迴圈息息相關?(貓吃掉它們的小貓)。而且, 匍匐螳螂般的那些幻覺的人物出沒精神分析的劇場,呈現在那裡,作為一種母親的意象,作為所謂的閹割人的母親的功用的基模。 將這個功用歸屬這樣的稱謂,可說是如此大膽, 畢竟是如此的不合倫常。

Yes, of course, I myself in my analytic initiation was happy to
take on the support of this image, so richly echoing for us the
natural domain, which is presented for us in the unconscious
phenomenon. To meet this objection you can suggest to me the
necessity of some correction in the theoretical line – I believe
I can satisfy you as well as myself.

當然, 沒錯,我自己處於我的精神分析的創議, 我是很樂意承受這個意象的支持, 對於我們而言, 它引起自然領域的充沛共鳴,它在無意識的現象裡,呈現給與我們。為了面對這個反對, 你們能夠跟我建議,在理論的脈絡某些修正的必要性—我相信我能夠滿足你們以及我自己。

I dwelt for a moment on what this image represents and asked myself in a certain fashion what in effect a simple glance thrown on the diversity of animal ethology shows us, namely the luxuriant richness of perversions.

讓我詳述一下, 這個意象代表什麼,然後以某種方式詢問我自己,實際上, 動物行為學跟我們顯示的動物的多樣性,讓我們瞥見的東西,換句話說, 各種變態行為的五花八門。

Someone well-known, my friend Henri Ey, has looked carefully at this subject of animal perversions which go further after all than anything that human imagination has been able to invent: I believe that he even
devoted an edition of L’evolution psychiatrique to it.

某位著名的人,我的朋友亨利,艾,他曾經細心地觀看動物變態行為的這個主題。畢竟,動物的變態行為,匪夷所思的程度,遠超過人類的想像力所能杜撰。我相信, 他甚至專注一本「精神分析的進化」來探討它。

Taking things in this register, do we not see ourselves brought back to
the Aristotelian point of view of a sort of field outside the human field as the basis of perverse desires? This is where I would stop you for a moment by asking you to consider what we are doing when we dwell on this phantasy of natural perversion.

以這個銘記來接受事情, 我們難道不是看到自己被帶回到亞力斯多德的觀點?關於人類領域之外的一種領域,作為變態欲望的基礎? 這就是我要阻止你們一下子的地方。我要求你們考慮一下, 當我們詳述自然界動物變態行為的這個幻見, 我們正在做什麼?

I am not overlooking that in asking you to follow me onto this terrain how fastidious, speculative such a reflection may appear to you but I believe that it is necessary in order to decant what is both founded and unfounded in this reference.

當我要求你們跟隨我踏上這個平臺,我並沒有忽略,這樣一種反思在你們眼中看來,是多麼的過於挑剔的沉思。但是我相信, 這是需要的, 為了要傾倒出這個指稱被創建以及沒有被創建的東西。

And moreover through this we are going – you are going to see it right away – to find ourselves rejoining what I designate as fundamental in
subjectivication, as the essential moment in the whole establishment of the dialectic of desire.

而且,通過這個,我們將會—你們將會立刻看出它—為了發現我們自己重新加入我指明是基本的東西,在生命的主體化, 作為基本的時刻, 在欲望的辯證法的整個建立過程。

To subjectivise the praying mantis on this occasion, is to suppose for it, which is not excessive, a sexual jouissance.

在這個場合, 將匍匐的螳螂生命主體化,就是替他假定一個性的歡爽, 雖然並不很過分。

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

拉康論移情 0315g

September 19, 2011

拉康論移情 0315g

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研討班第八冊

Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 14: Wednesday 15 March 1961

And no doubt it is not in vain that it should be in connection
with this word liquorice that we are able to find one of the
really – it must be admitted – sugary examples, of the perfect
ambiguity of signifying transcriptions.

無可置疑,這並非徒然,關於甘草這個字詞,我們應該能夠找到一個真正具有甜味的例—我們必須承認—對於能指化的書寫的完美的模糊曖昧。

Allow me this little parenthesis. This pearl which I found for your use along my path, this did not happen yesterday, I have kept this for you for a long time but because I meet it in connection with Bout de Zan
I am going to give it to you; liquorice (reglisse) then, we are told, is originally glukurrhiza.

請容許我使用這個小括弧。沿著我的途徑,我找到讓你們使用的這個珍珠,這並不是昨天才發生的。 長久以來,我一直保持這個珍珠給予你們, 但是因為我是在「騙子叔叔」影片裡遇到它,我將會將它給你們。我們聽說,甘草原先是「甜蜜的草根」。

Of course, this does not come directly from the Greek, but when the Latins heard that, they made of it liquiritia by making use of liqueur whence, in old French, this became licorice, then ricolice by metathesis. Ricolice met up with regle, regula is thus what gives us (10) réglisse. You must admit this encounter of licorice with la regie is really superb.

當然,這並不是直接來自希臘字源,而是當羅馬人聽到它時,他們使用甘草來解釋甜蜜的草根。在古法文,這就變成licorice,然後由於音位轉換,變成ricorice。Ricorice 再跟regle 混合,變成 regula ,這就是為什麼我們被給予réglisse 這個字詞。 你們必須承認這個licorice 跟 la regie 的邂逅,真是妙不可言。

But this is not all, because the conscious etymology at which all of this culminated, on which the last generations finally came to rest indeed, is that réglisse should be written reygalisse, because réglisse is made from a sweet root which is only found in Galicia, the rai [radix] of
Galicia, here is what we get back to after having started – and there is no mistake about it – from the Greek root.

但是這並非全部,因為意識到詞源學,這一切都在那裡達到顛峰。過去幾代來最後漸漸安穩下來,réglisse 應該被書寫為reygalisse,因為réglisse 是由一種甜蜜的草根形成。這個甜蜜的草根只有在Galicia 這個地方才找得到。Galicia 的這個根, 就是我們回頭要探討的,在我們從希臘字根開始後, 關於它,這是毋庸置疑的。

I think that this little demonstration of signifying ambiguities
will have convinced you that we are on a solid ground in giving
all its importance to it.

我認為能指化的模糊曖昧的這個小小的證明,將會讓你們相信, 我們處於堅固的立場,強調它的重要。

When all is said and done, as we have seen, we should more than
elsewhere be reserved at the anal level as regards the understanding of the other, precisely because any formulation of his demand implicates him so profoundly that we should look at it twice before going to meet it.

當一切都說都做了, 如我們曾經看見,我們應該被保留在肛門層次的其它地方,關於大它者的瞭解。 確實是因為任何對於他的要求的說明,都如此深刻地牽連到他。我們應該再三觀看之後,才前去跟它會合。

And what am I telling you there, if not something which rejoins what you all know, at least those of you who have done a little bit of therapeutic work, namely that with obsessionals you must not give them the least bit of encouragement, of déculpabilisation indeed even of interpretative
commentary which goes a little bit too far because then you have
to go much further and that, what you would find yourself coming to and conceding to your own great disadvantage, is precisely to this mechanism through which he wants to make you eat, as I might say, his own being as a shit.

我現在正在告訴的,即使不是連接你們所知道的,至少是你們那些曾經從事治療工作的人。換句話說,對於妄想症患者,你們一定不要給予他們任何的鼓勵, 甚至連解釋的評論都不要。解釋的評論還有待保留,因為你們必須要探究的還很多。你們見會發現結果會造成,並且承認對自己相當不利。 確實是由於這個機械結構,通過它, 他想要你讓你吃下他的生命實存,當著糞便,我不妨這樣說。

You are well taught by experience that this is not a process in which you will be of any use to him, quite the contrary.

精神分析經驗清楚地教導你們, 這並不是一個過程,你們將會對他有用,恰恰相反地。

It is elsewhere that in placing symbolic introjection for oneself in so far as it has to restore the place of desire in him and moreover because – to anticipate what is going to be the next stage – what the neurotic most usually wants to be is the phallus, it is certainly to shortcircuit inappropriately the satisfactions to be given to him to offer him this phallic communion against which as you know that, in my seminar on Desire
and its interpretation, I already brought forward the most precise objections.

確實是在別的地方, 當我們獨立地放置象徵的投入,它必須恢復他身上欲望的位置,而且因為—為了預期什麼是下一個階段—神經症患者通常最想要的是陽具, 這確實是不合宜地中斷應該給予他的滿足, 提供給他這個陽具的交流。你們知道,在我討論欲望及其解釋的研討班,我已經提出最明確的反對這種陽具的交流。

I mean that the phallic object as imaginary object cannot in any case lend itself to revealing in a complete fashion the fundamental phantasy. To the demand of the neurotic, it can only in fact respond by something which we can call in general an obliteration, in other words a way which is
offered to him of forgetting a certain number of the most essential principles which played a part in the accidents of his access to the field of desire.

我的意思是, 陽具的客體,作為想像的客體, 無論如何,並無助於以完整的方式顯示這個基本的幻見。 對於神經症患者的要求, 事實上, 它僅能用某件東西回應, 那就是我們普遍稱為的忘卻。換句話說,一個方法被提供給他,讓他忘記某些最基本的原則。在他接近欲望的這個領域發生的意外,這些基本原則扮演一個角色。

In order to mark a pause in our journey and what we have put forward today we are saying the following, that if the neurotic is unconscious that is to say repressed desire, it is above all in the measure that his desire undergoes the eclipse of a counter-demand.

為了要在我們探索旅途,標示停頓及今天我們曾經提出的東西,我們將說以下: 假如神經症患者是無意識, 那是說被壓抑的欲望, 尤其是, 隨著他的欲望經歷一種反要求的遮蔽。

This locus of the counter-demand is properly speaking the same as the one where there is placed, where there is built up subsequently everything that from the outside may be added on as a supplement to the construction of the super-ego.

反要求的軌跡,適當來說, 跟底下的這個相同。在隨後每一樣東西被建立的地方, 從外面被增加,作為超我的建構的補助。

A certain fashion of satisfying this counter-demand ……….. every
premature mode of interpretation in so far as it understands too
quickly, in so far as it does not perceive that what is most important to understand in the demand of the analysand is what is beyond this demand – it is the incomprehensible margin which is that of desire – it is in this measure that an analysis stops prematurely and in a word, fails.

某些滿足這個反要求的方式,,,每個早熟解釋的模式, 因為它過於迅速地瞭解,它沒有感覺到, 在受分析者的要求,為了要瞭解,最重要的事情是,超越這個要求的東西—就是這個無法被理解的邊緣,是欲望的要求—就在這裡, 精神分析過早地停止, 總之,它功敗垂成。

(11) Of course the trap is that in interpreting you give the subject something to feed himself on, the word even the book which is behind it, and that the word remains all the same the locus of desire, even if you give it in such a way that this locus is not recognisable, I mean that if this locus remains, for the desire of the subject, uninhabitable.

當然,這個陷阱是,在解釋時,你給予生命主體某件東西,來滿足他,這個字詞,甚至字詞背後的這本書。字詞始終是欲望的軌跡,即使你給予它,以這樣一種方式, 這個軌跡並不是可體認得出來。我的意思是,假如這個軌跡始終存在, 對於生命主體的欲望,它是不適合於居住地。

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

拉康論移情 0315f

September 19, 2011

拉康論移情 0315f

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研討班第八冊

Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 14: Wednesday 15 March 1961

It is precisely in the measure that the other here as such, fully
takes over dominance in the anal relationship that the sexual is
going to manifest itself in the register which is proper to this
stage.

確實是隨著大它者在此地本身,完全接管肛門關係的支配,性即將要展示它自己,在這個階段本體的銘記。

We can approach it, we can glimpse it by recalling its antecedent qualified as oral-sadistic (a reminder that in short life fundamentally is devouring assimilation as such) and moreover that this theme of devouring was what was situated at the preceding stage in the margin of desire, this presence of the open maw of life is moreover what is going to appear to you here
as a sort of reflection, of phantasy, the fact that when the other is posed as the second term, he must appear as an existence offered up to this gap. Will we go so far as to say that suffering is implied in it? It is a very particular suffering.

我們能夠接近它,我們能夠瞥見它,當我們回想它的先例,具有資格充當口腔的虐待狂 (總之,這是一個提醒,生命基本上正在吞噬吸收的本身),而且,這個吞噬的主題,被定位在欲望邊緣的先前的階段。而且,生命之胃囊的這個存在,在此出現在你們面前, 作為一種對反思,一種對幻見。當大它者被提出作為第二個術語,他必須出現作為一種存在,這個事實提供填補這個差距。我們將要過分地說,痛苦被暗涵在裡面嗎? 這是一種非常特別的痛苦。

To evoke a sort of fundamental schema which, I believe, is the one which will best give you the structure of the sado-masochistic phantasy as such, I would say that it is a suffering expected by the other, that it is this suspension of the imaginary other as such above the gulf of suffering which forms the point, the axis of sado-masochistic eroticisation as such, that it is in this relationship that what is no longer the sexual pole but what is going to be the sexual partner is established at the level of the anal stage and that therefore, we can say that it is already a sort of reappearance of the sexual.

為了召喚一種基本的基模,我相信,這個基模最能給予你們,虐待狂與受虐狂的幻見到結構。我不妨說,這是一種有大它者期望的痛苦,這個想像的大它者本身,高高懸置在痛苦的深淵之上。這種痛苦形成這個點,虐待狂與受虐狂性愛化本身的軸心。就在這層關係, 不再是性的極端,而是將成為性的伴侶,被建立在肛門的階段。因此, 我們能夠說,這已經是性的重新出現。

What in the anal stage is constituted as sadistic or sadomasochistic
structure is, starting from a point of maximum eclipse of the sexual, from a point of pure anal oblativity, the re-ascent towards that which is going to be realised at the genital stage.

在肛門的階段,被組成作為虐待狂或受虐狂的結構,從性的最大遮蔽的點開始, 從純粹是肛門奉獻物的點開始, 這個重新上升,朝向在性器官階段將會被實現的東西。

The preparation of the genital, of human eros, of desire emitted in normal fullness (in order that it may be able to situate itself not as tendency, need, not as pure and simple copulation but as desire) takes it beginnings, finds its starting point, finds its point of reemergence in relationship to the other as undergoing the expectation of this suspended threat,
of this virtual attack which founds, which characterises, which
(9) justifies for us what is called the sadistic theory of sexuality whose primitive character we know in the great majority of individual cases.

性器官,人類性愛,在正常充實時逬放的欲望的準備 (為了讓它能夠定位它自己,不是作為傾向,需要,不是作為純粹就是交媾,而是作為欲望),這個準備從開始就接受它, 找到它的開始點,找到它重新出現點,在跟大它者的關係,作為正在經歷這個被懸置的威脅的期望。對於我們而言,這個虛擬的攻擊創立,表現特色,證明理由,替所謂的性的虐待狂理論。在無數個別的案例,我們獲知這種性的虐待狂理論的原初特性。

What is more, it is in this situational feature that there is founded the fact that in the origin of this sexualisation of the other that we are dealing with, he must as such be delivered to a third in order to be constituted in this first mode of his apperception as sexual and it is here there lies the origin of this ambiguity, which we know, which ensures that the sexual as such remains, in the original experience which the most recent theoreticians of psychoanalysis were the discoverers of,
indeterminate between this third and this other.

而且, 在這個情境的特徵,這個事實被創立:我們正在處理的大它者,在他的這個性化的起源,他必須本身被交付給一個第三者,為了要能夠被形成,在他作為性的統覺的這個最初模式。這個模糊曖昧的起源就在這裡, 我們知道,它確定:性的本身始終存在,在原初的經驗, 精神分析的最近理論是它們的發現者, 它擺盪在這個第三者與這個大它者之間。

In the first form of libidinal perception of the other, at the level of this point of re-ascent from a certain punctiforme eclipse of the libido as such, the subject does not know what he most desires, from this other or from the third who intervenes, and this is essential for the whole structure of sado-masochistic phantasies.

在大它者的力比多的感覺到第一個形式,在重新上升到這個點的層次,從力比多本身的某些點的遮蔽,生命主體並不知道, 他最欲望什麼, 從這個它者, 從介入的這個第三者。這是很重要的, 對於虐待狂與受虐狂的幻見的整個結構。

Because the one who constructs this phantasy, let us not forget it, if we have given here a correct analysis of the anal stage, this subject-witness to this pivotal point of the anal stage is indeed what he is, I have just said it: he is shit!

因為建構這個幻見的這個人,讓我們不要忘記它,假如我們在此給予一種正確的精神分析,對於肛門的階段, 這個生命主體,作為肛門階段的這個軸鈕點的見證者,我剛剛說過:他是糞便。

And what is more he is demand, he is shit which only demands to be eliminated. This is the true foundation of a whole radical structure that you will find, especially in the phantasies, in the fundamental phantasy of the obsessional in so far as he devalues himself, in so far as he puts outside himself the whole game of the erotic dialectic, that he pretends, as someone has said, to be its organiser.

而且,他是這個要求,他僅是要求被排泄的糞便。這是一整個結構的真實的基礎, 你們將會發現,特別是在這些幻見, 在妄想症的基本幻見, 當他貶低他自己,他將性愛辯證法的整個遊戲,擺置在他自己外面。如同某人所說,他假裝是它的組織者。

It is on the foundation of his own elimination that he grounds the whole of this phantasy. And things here are rooted in something which, once they are recognised, allow you to elucidate quite commonplace points.

在他自己被排泄的這個基礎上, 他建立這個幻見的整個結構。 在此的事情根源於某件東西, 一旦它們被體認出來, 這個東西容許你能夠詮釋相當普遍的要點。

Because if things are really fixed at this point of the identification of the subject to the excremental little o, what are we going to see? Let us not forget that here it is no longer to the organ itself involved in the dramatic knot of need to demand that there is entrusted, at least in principle, the task of articulating this demand. In other words, except in the paintings of Jerome Bosch, one does not speak with one’s behind.

因為假如事情真的被固定,在生命主體認同於糞便的小客體,我們將會看到什麼?讓我們不要忘記, 在此,它不再是認同於器官的本身,牽涉到這個戲劇性的需要的結,要求表達這個需要的工作,要被信任,至少在原則上。 換句話說, 除了在傑羅米,柏奇的圖畫裡, 我們沒有人是用我們的屁股在言說。

And nevertheless, we have curious phenomena of cutting, followed by explosions of something which make us glimpse the symbolic function of the excremental ribbon in the very articulation of the word.

可是, 我們擁有耐人尋味的切割現象,後面跟隨著某件東西的爆炸。這些爆炸讓我們瞥見糞便帶狀物的象徵功用,在這個字詞的表達。

Once upon a time, it is a very long time ago and I think there is
nobody here who would remember it, there was a sort of little
personage…. – there have always been little significant
personages in infantile mythology which in reality is of parental
origin, in our own day people talk a lot about Pinocchio – at a
time which I am old enough to remember there existed Bout de Zan.

從前,很久以前,我認為在此沒有人會記得它,有某種的人物,,,—曾經有一些無足輕重的人物, 在嬰兒的神話裡。實際上,它們屬於父母的起源, 在我們自己的時代,人們時常談論到品諾奇奧—有一陣子,我年紀足夠大可以記住「偷走大象」的存在。

The phenomenology of the child as precious excremental object is
entirely in this designation where the child is identified with the sweetish substance of what is called liquorice, glukurrhiza
“the sweet root”, which it appears is its Greek origin.

小孩的現象學,作為珍貴的糞便客體,完全在這個指稱。在那裡,小孩被認同於所謂甘草的甜味物質, 「甜蜜的草根」,這個字詞似乎是希臘的起源。

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

拉康論移情 0315e

September 18, 2011

拉康論移情 0315e

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研討班第八冊

Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 14: Wednesday 15 March 1961

The elaboration which results from the complexity of the demand
is worth our while dwelling on because it is essential. Observe
that here is is no longer a question of the simple relationship
of a need with the liaison to its demanded form but of the sexual
surplus.

因為要求的複雜性而造成的建構,值得詳述,因為這是基本。請觀察一下,在此的問題不再是一種溝通的需要,跟它的被要求的形式的關係,而是跟性的剩餘的關係。

It is something else, it is a disciplining of need that is in question and sexualisation is only produced in the movement of return to need which, as I might say legitimates this need as gift to the mother who is waiting for the child to satisfy his functions which are going to make emerge, make appear something which is worthy of general approbation.

它是某件別的東西,它是一種受到質疑的需要的的紀律,性化僅是在需要的回轉的運動,才會產生。我不妨說,這個回轉的運動,使這個需要合理化,充當給予母親的禮物。因為母親正在等待小孩滿足他的功用。這些功用將會使某件東西出現,這是值得普遍的贊許。

Moreover this gift-character of excrement is well known from experience and was spotted from the beginning of analytic experience. To such an
extent is an object experienced here in this register that the child, in the excess of his occasional outbursts uses it, one might say, naturally, as a means of expression.

而且,這種糞便具有禮物的特性,是根據精神分析經驗眾所周知,從精神分析經驗的開始,就被偵察出來。在此,一個客體被經驗到這樣一個程度,在這個銘記裡,以致於小孩,在他的偶爾的爆發的過度裡,會使用它,很自然地, 充當一種表達的工具,我們不妨說。

The excremental gift forms part of the most antique thematic of analysis.
I would like in this connection to give in a way its final term to this extermination – for which I have always been striving – to the myth of oblativity by showing you here what it really refers to.

糞便的禮物形成精神分析最古老的部分主題,我想要在這方面,以某種方式給予它的最後的術語,給予這個終結—我總是在奮鬥要獲得這個終結—終結奉獻物的神話,我在此跟你們顯示,它確實提到什麼。

Because from the moment that you have once seen it, you will no longer be able to recognise otherwise this field of anal dialectic which is the real field of oblativity.

因為從你們有一度看到它開始,你們將不再能夠體認出,又名肛門變證法的這個領域。這個肛門變證法就是奉獻物的真實領域。

For a long time in different forms I have tried to introduce you
to this mapping out and specifically by having always pointed out
to you that the very term oblativity is an obsessional phantasy.

“Everything for the other” says the obsessional and this indeed is what he does. Because the obsessional being in the perpetual vertigo of the destruction of the Other, can never do enough to allow the other to maintain himself in existence. But here we see its root, the anal stage is characterised by the fact that the subject satisfies a need uniquely for the satisfaction of an other.

「每一樣東西奉獻給大它者」,妄想症者說,這確實是他所做的。因為妄想症者處於大它者的毀滅的永恆的暈眩,只要讓大它者能夠維持他自己存在,無論怎麼做也不過分。但是在此, 我們看到它的根源, 肛門的階段,表現特性是根據這個事實:生命主體獨特地滿足一種需要,是為了滿足一個大它者。

He has been taught to retain this need uniquely in order that it should be founded, established as the occasion of the satisfaction of the other who is the educator.

他被教導要獨特地保留這個需要,為了讓它被創立,被建立,作為大它者滿足的場合,這個大它者是教育者。

The satisfaction of babyhood of which wiping the bottom forms a part
is first of all that of the other.

嬰兒期的滿足,首先就是大它者的滿足,當搽拭屁股形成嬰兒期的部分。

And it is properly in so far as something that the subject has is
demanded from him as a gift, that one can say that oblativity is
linked to the sphere of relationships at the anal stage.

這是適當地, 生命主體具有的某件東西,從他被要求,作為一種禮物。我們能夠說,奉獻物跟肛門階段的關係的領域息息相關。

And note the consequence of this, which is that here the margin of
the place which remains to the subject as such, in other words desire comes to be symbolised in this situation by what is carried away in the operation: desire literally goes down the toilet.

請注意這個的結果,在此,保留給生命主體本身的這個地方的邊緣,換句話說,欲望漸漸被象徵,在這個情境,被這個運作帶走的東西: 欲望實質上掉落到馬桶裡。

The symbolisation of the subject as that which goes into the pot or into the hole on occasion is properly what we encounter in experience as most profoundly linked to the position of anal desire.

生命主體的象徵化,作為掉落到糞盆裡,或有時掉落到糞洞裡,適當來說,是在精神分析經驗,我們遭遇的東西,跟肛門欲望的位置最緊密地息息相關。

It is indeed what makes of it both the ……… and also in many cases the avoidance, I mean that we do not always succeed in bringing the insight of the patient to this (8) term.

這確實是解釋它充當,,,而且在許多情況,充當避免。我的意思是,我們總是成功地將病人的這個洞見,帶到這個術語。

Nevertheless you can assure yourselves each time, in so far as the anal stage is involved, that you would be mistaken not to mistrust the relevance of your analysis if you have not encountered this term.

可是,你們每次都能夠確定, 就肛門階段而言, 假如你們不去懷疑你們的精神分析的相關性,假如你們沒有遭遇這個術語, 你們就搞錯了。

For that matter moreover, I assure you that from the moment that you have touched on what must be called this precise, neuralgic point, which is just as valuable because of the importance that it has in experience as all the remarks about the good or bad primitive oral objects, as long as you have not located at this point the fundamental, deep- seated relationship of the subject as desire with the most disagreeable object, you will not have taken any great step in the analysis of the conditions of desire.

而且,就那件事情而言,我告訴你們,從你們已經探討到這個所謂的明確的神經痛的點開始,這是同樣的有價值, 因為它在精神分析經驗,擁有的重要性,作為所有的標記,關於無論是好壞的原始的口腔的客體。只要你們沒有在這時找到這個基本的根深柢固的關係,作為欲望的生命主體跟最令人不舒服的客體的關係,在欲望的情況的精神分析,你們就不算是跨出任何一大步

And nevertheless you cannot deny that this reminder is given at
every instant in the analytic tradition.

可是,你們不能否認,在精神分析的傳統,這個提醒隨時都被給予。

I think that you would not have been able to remain deaf to it
for so long except for the fact that things have not been
highlighted in their fundamental topology as I am trying to do it
for you here.

我認為,你們本來就不可能對於它長久視而不見,除了這個事實:事情還沒有被強調,在它們的基本的拓撲圖形,如同我在此將要跟你們所做的。

But then, you will say to me, what about the sexual here and the
famous sadistic drive that is conjugated – with the help of a
hyphen – to the term anal as if that went simply without saying?

但是,你們將會跟我說,在此,性的問題又如何?著名的虐待狂的驅力又如何?—憑藉槓號標點的幫忙—這個驅力跟肛門這個術語結合在一起,好像大家心照不宣。

It is quite clear that here some effort is necessary of what we
cannot call understanding except in so far as it is a question of
understanding at the limit. The sexual can only enter in here
in a violent fashion.

顯而易見的, 在此,某種理解的努力是需要的,雖然我們說不上是理解。問題是理解的極限。 只有以暴力的方式,性才會進入這裡。

This indeed is what happens here in effect because moreover it is a sadistic violence that is in question. This still preserves in itself more than one enigma and it would be well for us to dwell on it.

這確實是在此實際上所發生的事情,因為而且在此受到質疑的,就是這個虐待狂的暴力。 這依舊本身保留不僅是一個謎團,我們最好詳述它一下。

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

拉康論移情 0315d

September 18, 2011

拉康論移情 0315d

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研討班第八冊

Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 14: Wednesday 15 March 1961

We find here this situation which I cannot better express than by
playing on the equivocation of the sonorities of French phonematics, the fact is that one cannot avow the following to the most primordial Other:”tu es le desirf you are the desire”, without at the same time saying to her: “tuer le desir, kill the desire” without conceding to her that she kills the desire, without abandoning to her desire as such.

我們在此發現到這個情境,我無以名狀,除了玩弄法語語音的響亮的模棱兩可。事實上,對於即使是最原初的大它者, 我們無法坦率承認以下:「你就是欲望」,而不對她說:「殺死這個欲望」,而不對她承認:她殺死這個欲望,而不耽溺於她的欲望本身。

And the first ambivalence proper to every demand is that in every demand there is also implied that the subject does not want it to be satisfied, aims in itself at the safeguarding of desire, testifies to the blind presence of the unnamed, blind desire.

每個要求本體的最初的愛恨交加,就是,在每個要求裡, 暗示著,生命主體並不想要它被滿足,在本身目標朝向欲望的捍衛,證明這個無名的盲目的欲望的盲目存在。

What is this desire? We know it in the most classical and most original fashion, it is in so far as the oral demand has another meaning than that of the satisfaction of hunger that it is a sexual demand, that it is fundamentally, Freud tells us since the Three essays on the theory of sexuality, cannibalistic and that cannibalism has a sexual sense (he reminds us that here is what (6) is masked in the first Freudian formulation) that to feed himself is for man linked to the goodwill of the other.

這個欲望是什麼呢?我們知道它,以最古典最原創的形式。這個口腔期待要求擁有另外一種意義,除了饑餓的滿足。它是一種性的要求, 它在基本上是食人肉的, 佛洛伊德告訴我們, 自從有關性的理論的三篇論文發表。食人肉具有性的意義 ( 他提醒我們, 在此是佛洛伊德的最初的說明,被遮蔽的地方,)對於人而言, 滿足自己跟大它者的善意息息相關。

Linked to this fact by a polar relationship, there exists also this
term that it is not only from the bread of her goodwill that the
primitive subject has to feed himself, but well and truly from the body of the one who feeds him.

由於一種相反對立的關係,這個術語的存在,也跟這個事實息息相關。原初的生命主體,不但必須以她的善意的麵包滿足自己, 而且道道地地使用滿足他的這個生命主體的身體。

Because things must be called by their name, what we call sexual relationship, is that by which the relationship to the other leads on to a union of bodies. And the most radical union is that of the original
absorption to which there points, there is aimed the horizon of
cannibalism and which characterises the oral phase for what it is
in analytic theory.

因為事情必須被直稱其名, 我們所謂的性關係, 憑藉它,跟大它者的關係導致身體的一種結合。 最強烈的結合就是這個原初的吸收的結合, 目標指著食人肉的視野。在精神分析理論,它表現口腔期本質的特色。

Let us carefully observe here what is in question. I took things
from the most difficult end by beginning at the origin, even though it is always retroactively, by going backwards that we ought to discover how things are constructed in real development.

讓我們小心在此觀察受到質疑的東西。我從原初開始,從最困難的末端探討, 即使它總是會反彈,會反溯,我們應該發現,在真實的發展, 事情是如何被建構。

There is a theory of libido against which as you know I rebel even though it is one put forward by one of our friends, Alexander, the theory of libido as a surplus of energy which manifests itself in the living being when the satisfaction of needs linked to preservation has been obtained.

有一個力比多的理論。你們知道,我反叛這個理論,即使它是由我們的一位朋友,亞歷山大提出。這個力比多的理論,作為一種精力的剩餘。這種精力的剰餘展現它自己,在具有生命的生物上,當跟保存有關的需要的滿足已經被獲得。

It is very convenient but it is false because sexual libido is not that.
Sexual libido is indeed in effect a surplus but it is this surplus which renders vain any satisfaction of need there where it is placed and, if necessary – it must be said – refuses this satisfaction to preserve the function of desire.

它是很方便,但是它是虛假,因為性的力比多不是那樣。性的力比多實際上確實是剩餘,但是就是這種剩餘使得需要的任何滿足,在它被置放的地方,變得徒勞。若有必要—我們必須說—它會拒絕這種滿足,為了保存欲望的這個功用。

And moreover all of this is only something evident which is everywhere confirmed, as you will see by going back and starting again from the demand to be fed; as you will immediately put your finger on it in the fact that from the simple fact that the tendency of this mouth which is hungry, through this same mouth expressing a signifying chain….

而且,所有這一切僅是某件明顯的東西,到處都可證實。你們將會看出,當你們回溯並且再一次從應該被滿足的要求開始。你們將立刻根據這個事實理解它,根據這個簡單的事實, 這個饑餓的嘴巴的傾向, 通過這個相同的嘴巴,表達一種能指化的鎖鏈,,,

well then, it is in this way that there enters into it the possibility of designating the food that it desires. What food? The first thing which results from it, is that this mouth can say: “Not that!” Negation, the pushing aside, the “I like that and not anything else” of desire already enters there where there explodes the specificity of the dimension of desire.

呵呵,以這種方式,指明它欲望的食物的可能性,進入裡面。什麼食物?從它那裡產生出來的第一件東西,就是這個嘴巴會說:「不是那個!」否定, 推向一旁, 這個「我喜歡那個,而不是欲望的別的東西」,它已經進到那裡,欲望的維度的明確性,就在那裡爆炸。

Hence the extreme prudence that we should have concerning our interventions, our interpretations, at the level of this oral register.

因此,我們應該要極端謹慎, 關於我們的介入,我們的解釋, 在這個口腔銘記的層次。

Because as I said, this demand is formed at the same point, at the level of the same organ where the tendency emerges.

因為如我所說,這個要求在相同點被形成,在傾向出現的相同器官的層次。

And it is indeed here that there lies the confusion, the possibility of producing all sorts of equivocations by responding to him. Of course, from the fact that he is responded to there results all the same the
preservation of this field of the word and the possibility therefore of always discovering in it the place of desire – but also the possibility of all the suggestions of those who try to impose on the subject that since his need is satisfied he should be content with it, from which there results compensated frustration and the end of analytic intervention.

確實在這裡,混淆出現,以回應它的方式,產生各種模棱兩可的可能性。當然,根據他被回應這個事實, 文字的這個領域的保存會隨之產生, 因此有可能總是在裡面發現欲望的位置—而且,有可能,那些人的所有的建議,他們嘗試在生命主體身上賦加各種可能性, 因為既然他的需要被滿足,他應該滿足他的需要。從那裡,補償性的挫折,隨之產生,精神分析的介入因而結束。

I want to go further and today I really have, as you are going to see, my reasons for doing so. I want to pass on to what is called the stage of anal libido. Because moreover it is here that I believe I can encounter, get to and refute a certain (7) number of confusions which are introduced in the most common fashion in analytic interpretation.

我想要更深入探討,你們將會看出,今天我確實有理由這樣做。我想要繼續探討所謂的肛門期力比多的階段。因為而且在這裡, 我相信我能夠遭遇,到達,並且反駁某些的混淆。這些混淆在精神分析的解釋,以最尋常的方式被介紹。

By tackling this term by way of what is the demand at this anal stage, you all have I think enough experience for me not to illustrate any more what I would call the demand to retain excrement, founding no doubt something which is a desire to expel. But here it is not so simple because also this expulsion is also required by the educating parent at a certain moment.

憑藉著在這個肛門期階段的要求的東西,來克服這個術語, 我想你們都已經擁有足夠經驗,不需要我再舉例說明我所謂的保留糞便的要求。無可置疑的,它創建了某件東西, 那就是驅除的欲望。但是在這裡, 問題不那麼簡單, 因為在某個時刻,這個驅除也被教育的父母要求。

Here it is demanded of the subject to give something which would
satisfy the expectation of the educator, the maternal one on this
occasion.

在此,生命主體被要求給予某件東西,來滿足教育者的期望,在這個場合,那就是母親的期望。

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

拉康論移情 0315c

September 18, 2011

拉康論移情 0315c

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研討班第八冊

Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 14: Wednesday 15 March 1961

It is therefore by following the path of something which is the
resistance to this final aim, the resistance situated in the unconscious function of the ego, that Freud tells us that we must pass this way that “the physician cannot as a rule spare his patient this phase of the treatment. He must get him to re-experience some portion of his forgotten life, but must see to (4) it, on the other hand, that there is maintained some degree von Überlegenheit, of aloofness, so that it can be recognised, in spite of everything, that what appears to be reality, die auscheinende Realität, is in fact only a reflection of a forgotten past”. God knows the abuses of interpretation to which this highlighting of this Überlegenheit has lent itself.

因此以遵照某件東西的途徑,對於這個最後目標的抗拒,被定位在自我的無意識的功用,佛洛伊德告訴我們,我們必須以這種方式通過,「醫生通常無法替病人減省掉治療的這個部分他必須讓他重新經驗他受到遺忘的生命的某個部分,但是他必須負責,在另一方面,有某個程度的疏離被維持。這樣,它才能夠被體認出來,儘管一切。 外表看起來是現實界,實際上僅是一個被遺忘的過去的反映。」。天曉得,這是解釋的爛用, 這個疏離的強調所給予的解釋。

It is around this that the whole theory of alliance with what is called the healthy part of the ego was able to be constructed.

跟所謂的自我的健康部分的結盟的整個理論,就是環繞這一點能夠被建構。

There is nevertheless in such a passage nothing of the kind and I
cannot sufficiently underline what must have appeared to you in
passing, it is in a way the neutral character, ne-uter, neither
on one side or the other, of this Überlegenheit.

可是在這樣一個過程,根本就不是這個樣子。對於偶爾出現在你們身上的東西,我越強調越好。 它在某方面具有中立的特性, 既不是疏離的這一邊,也不是另外一邊。

Where is this aloofness? Is it on the side of the doctor who, let us hope,
keeps his wits about him? Is this what is to be understood on this occasion or is it something on the side of the patient?

這個疏離在哪裡?它難道不是在醫生的這一邊嗎?容我們希望,醫生能脫離病人理智清明嗎? 在這個場合, 這不就是應該被瞭解的東西?或是它是在病人這一邊的某件東西?

A curious thing, in the French translation – which, with respect
to others, is as bad as those which have been made under different other patronages – the thing is translated: et doit seulement veiller a ce que le malade conserve un certain degre de sereine superiority – there is nothing like this in the text – qui lui permette de constater, malgre tout, que la realite de ce qu’il reproduit n’est qu’apparenteT

在法文的翻譯,這是一件耐人尋味的事情—關於其他的人,這件事情跟那些在不同的其他顧客所形成的事情同樣糟糕—這件事情被翻譯為:et doit seulement veiller a ce que le malade conserve un certain degre de sereine superiority—在文本裡,像這樣翻譯最好不過:qui lui permette de constater, malgre tout, que la realite de ce qu’il reproduit n’est qu’apparenteT

So that indeed must we not situate the question of the situation of this Überlegenheit which is no doubt required, which we are dealing with, in a fashion which, I believe, can be infinitely more precise than everything
that is elaborated, in these so-called comparisons by the current
aberration of what is being repeated in the treatment with a situation which would be presented as perfectly known.

所以,我 們一定不要定位這個疏離的情境的問題。無可置疑的, 我們正在處理的這個疏離,以某種方式是必要。我相信, 這個疏離比被建構的一切,都更加明確得多,在這些所謂的比較,根據在情境治療所正在重複的東西的目前偏離。這個情境將會被呈現,作為耳熟能詳。

Let us rebegin then from the examination of the phases and the demand, from the exigencies of the subject as we approach them in our interpretations, and let us simply begin in accordance with this chronology, in accordance with this diachrony called the phases of the libido, with the most simple demand, the one to which we refer so frequently, let us say that it is a question of an oral demand. What is an oral demand?

讓我們從這些部分及要求的審查重新開始, 從生命主體的迫切需要,當我們用我們的解釋探討它們。 讓我們僅是從遵照這個年表開始,遵照所謂的力比多的各個階段的歷時分析,用最簡單的要求, 我們經常提到這個要求。讓我們說,這是一個口腔期的要求。 什麼是口腔期的要求?

It is the demand to be fed which is addressed to whom, to what? It is addressed to this Other who hears and who, at this primary level of the
enunciating of the demand, can really be designated as what we call the locus of the Other, the Other…. on, the Autron I would (5) say in order to make our designations rhyme with the familiar designations of physics. Here then to this abstract, impersonal Autron there is addressed by the subject, more or less without his knowing it, this demand to be fed.

這個應該被滿足的要求,是針對誰在訴說?訴求什麼?它是針對大它者在訴說, 大它者聽到,在要求的表達的這個初始層次, 大它者能夠真正地被指明,作為我們所謂的大它者的軌跡, 大它者,,,容我這樣說, 為了讓我們的指明與耳熟能詳的物理的指明,節奏相同。 在此, 對於這個抽象的,超然的大它者, 生命主體跟他訴說,自己不自覺地, 這個要求應該被滿足。

As we have said, every demand, from the fact that it is word, tends to structure itself in the fact that it summons from the Other its inverse response, that it evokes because of its structure its own form transposed according to a certain inversion.

我們說過, 每個要求,根據這個事實:它是文字,傾向於在這個事實裡架構自己。它從大它者召喚它的倒轉反映,因為它的結構, 它召喚它自己被調換的形式,依照某些的倒轉。

To the demand to be fed there responds, because of the signifying structure, at the locus of the Other, in a fashion that one may say to be logically contemporaneous with this demand, at the level of the Autron, the demand to allow oneself to be fed (de se laisser nourrir).

因為能指化的結構,應該被滿足的要求,在大它者的軌跡回應,使用的方式,我們可以說,在邏輯上是跟這個要求同時發生,在大它者的層次, 這個要求容許自己被滿足。

And we know well, in experience this is not the refined elaboration of a fictitious dialogue. We know well that this is what is in question between the child and the mother every time there breaks out in this relationship the slightest conflict in what seems to be constructed to meet, to fit together in a strictly complementary fashion.

我們清楚地知道,在精神分析經驗, 這並不是虛構對話的精鍊建構。 我們清楚地知道, 這是受到質疑的地方, 在小孩于母親之間,每一次即使是最輕微的衝突,都會在這個關係爆發,為了以緊密互補的方式,配合在一起。

What in appearance better responds to the demand to be fed than that of allowing oneself to be fed? We know nevertheless that it is in this very mode of confrontation of two demands that there lies this tiny gap,
this beance, this slit in which there can insinuate itself, in which there is normally insinuated the discordance, the preformed failure of this meeting consisting in the very fact that precisely it is not the meeting of tendencies but the meeting of demands.

在外表上, 有什麼更能恰好地回應應該被滿足的要求?難道不就是容許自己被滿足的這個要求?可是,我們知道,就在這兩個要求的衝突的模式, 這個小差距,這個罅隙,這個裂縫,就位在那裡。這個不協調,這個會合的表現的失敗,能夠迂迴地滲入,在那裡正常地滲入。這個會合在於這個事實:它確實並不是傾向的會合,而是要求的會合。

It is into this meeting of the demand to be fed and of the other demand to allow oneself to be fed that there slips the fact, manifested at the first conflict breaking out in the feeding relationship, that a desire overflows this demand and that it cannot be satisfied without this desire being extinguished there.

就在進入應該被滿足的要求, 與大它者容許自己被滿足的要求的會合,這個事實在那裡滑動, 在滿足的關係裡,爆發的第一個衝突點被展示。一種欲望滿溢這個要求,這個欲望假如在那裡被消滅, 它無法被滿足。

It is in order that this desire which overflows this demand should not be extinguished that even the subject who is hungry (from the fact that to his demand to be fed there responds the demand to allow oneself to be fed) does not allow himself to be fed, refuses in a way to disappear as desire by being satisfied as demand because the extinction or the
crushing of the demand in satisfaction cannot happen without killing desire.

為了讓這個滿溢這個要求的欲望不要被消滅,即使是饑餓的生命主體,( 根據這個事實: 容許自己被滿足的這個要求, 在那裡回應他應該被滿足的要求),都沒有容許自己被滿足。他以某種方式拒絕作為欲望消失, 他作為要求而被滿足,因為這個要求在滿足裡被消滅或是崩塌,假如沒有殺死欲望, 無法發生。

It is from here that there emerged these discordances of which the most vivid is that of the refusal to allow oneself to feed, of the anorexia more or less correctly described as nervosa (mentale).

就是從這裡,從小這些不協調。其中最明顯的不協調集是拒絕讓自己被滿足, 厭食症的不協調, 更正確地被描述為「神經質厭食症」。

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