Archive for the ‘Bataille巴岱伊’ Category

巴岱伊论尼采 21

May 30, 2011

Bataille 21

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊论尼采
PART II
Summit and Decline
巅峰与衰微
III b

If I now bring in the notion of temptation (often independent of the idea of sin, since our resistance often is out of fear of unpleasant consequences), it’s in order to note that in the interplay of the flesh, individual existences are obviously asserted as movement.
假如我现在带进诱惑的观念(往往独立于原罪的观念,因为阻抗往往的由于恐惧会有不愉快的后果。)那是为了要注意到,在肉体的互相运作中,个体的存在,显而易见,是以行动作为主张。

Temptation locates sexual misconduct as a confrontation with boredom. We aren’t always prey to boredom, and life retains the possibility of numerous communications. But if that possibility fails, boredom then discloses the nothingness of self-enclosure. When separate existence stops communicating, it withers. It wastes away, (obscurely) feeling that by itself it doesn’t exist. Unproductive and unattractive, such inner nothingness repels us. It brings about a fall into restless boredom, and boredom transfers the restlessness from inner nothingness to outer nothingness–or anguish.

诱惑探出性的错误行为,作为跟无聊的面对。我们未必总是无聊的猎物。生命保留无数心灵交流的可能性。但是,假如那个可能性失败,无聊因此会显露自我包容的空无。当分离的生命实存不再心灵交流,它会枯萎。它会卑微地消耗,感觉到,生命实存本身并不存在。由于没有创造,欠缺吸引力,这种内在的空无令我们感到厌恶。它导致我们掉入不安的无聊,而无聊从内在的空无,将不安转移进入外在的空无,或是痛苦。
In states of temptation, this transfer–in anguish–dwells endlessly on the nothingness with which a desire to communicate confronts us. If I contemplate the nothingness of obscenity independently of desire and so to speak on its own behalf, I only note the sensible, graspable sign of a limit at which being is confronted with lack. But in temptation, the outer nothingness appears as a reply to a yearning for communication.

在诱惑的状态,痛苦中的转移,无穷尽地描绘空无,因为一直想要心灵交流的渴望,让我们面对空无。假如我独立于欲望之外,也就是代表欲望的本身,沉思卑微的空无,我只会注意到限制的可理解与可掌握的迹象,生命实存与欠缺面对的限制。但是在诱惑中,外在的空无出现作为回答对于心灵交流的渴望。

The meaning and reality of this reply are easy to determine. I only communicate outside of me by letting go or being pushed to this outside. Still, outside of me, I don’t exist. There’s no doubt in my mind that to let go of existence inside me and to look for it outside is to take a chance on ruining or annhilating precisely whatever it is without which the outer existence wouldn’t have appeared in the first place–the self–which is the precondition for there being a “mine.” With temptation, if I can put it this way, we’re crushed by twin pincers of nothingness. By not communicating, we’re annihilated into the emptiness of an isolated life. By communicating we likewise risk being destroyed.

这种回答的意义跟现实,很容易决定。我只是在我的自身之外心灵交流,我放松自己,或是被逼迫到这个外面。可是,在我的自身之外,我并不存在。在我的心灵,这是无可置疑。放弃我自身之内的生命实存,然后到自身之外寻找它,这确实是冒险毁灭或是覆灭任何里面的东西。假如没有这个东西,外在的生命实存本来首先就不会出现—这个自我—是作为一个「我的」预设条件。由于诱惑,假如我以这种方式表达,我们被空无的两个钳子夹扁。由于没有心灵交流,我们被毁灭,成为一种孤立生活的空无。憑藉心灵交流,我们同样冒着被毁灭的危险。

Of course defilement is the real issue, and defilement isn’t death. Nonetheless, if under shameful conditions I give in–and so pay for a streetwalker–even if I don’t die, I’m still ruined and fallen in my own judgment. Crude obscenity gnaws away at my existence, its excremental nature rubbing off on me–this nothingness carried by filth, this nothingness I should have expelled, this nothingness I should have distanced myself from–and I’m left defenseless and vulnerable, opening myself to it in an exhausting wound.

当然,沾污是这个真实的问题,沾污并不是死亡。可是,假如在令人羞愧的状况,我屈服,(因此替娼妓偿付代价),即使我没有死亡,我依旧在我自己的判决中,被毁灭,被堕落。裸露的卑微咬啮我的生命实存,它的粪便般的特质正在影响到我。这个被肮脏扱带动空无,我本来应该驱散的空无,我本来应该将我跟它拉开距离的空无。我置身于没有防卫及易受伤害当中,我伤痕累累地暴露我自己于这个空无。

Clearly, ongoing resistance to temptation will accentuate this aspect of a life of the flesh. But the same element enters into all sensuality. Even weak communication requires a risk. It only takes place if individuals, leaning out over themselves, risk themselves under the threat of decline. This is why even the purest souls aren’t unaware of the sinkholes of ordinary sensuality (Despite themselves, they can’t exclude a familiarity with this). The purity to which they’re attached signifies that even the tiniest, most negligible portion of ignominy is enough to catch hold of them. With extreme aversion, they guess what drains others. The long and the short of it is, we all get h——-or the same reasons.

显而易见,对于诱惑的进行的阻抗,将会强调肉体生命的这一面。但是相同的因素进入一切都感官。即使是软弱的心灵交流都需要冒险。只有当个人,依靠着他们自己,在衰微的威胁下,自己冒着危险,心灵交流才会發生。这就是为什么,即使是最纯洁的灵魂,都并不知道普通感官的污水坑,(尽管他们自己,他们无法排除对于这种事情的熟悉。)跟他们相连的纯洁指示著,即使是最微小,最受忽略部分的羞辱,都足以掌控他们。由于极端的厌恶,他们猜测是什么耗尽别人。总而言之,我们因为同样的理由心肠变硬。
译者注
* [Bataille’s euphemism, referring to “hard”
这是巴岱伊的委婉语,提到「心肠硬」。

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

巴岱伊論尼采 20

May 29, 2011

Bataille 20

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊論尼采

PART II
Summit and Decline
巔峰與衰微
III
It would be terrible to still believe in sin; on the contrary everything we do, if we need to say this a thousand times, is innocent.
 1881-82
依舊相信原罪是非常可怕。相反的,每一我們所做的事情都是無罪的,即使我們需要說這句話一千遍。
—1881—1882

More often than the sacred object, desire has as its object the flesh; and in carnal desire, an interplay of “communication” appears in all its stringent complexity.

比起神聖的客體還要時常,欲望擁有肉身作為它的客體。在肉體的欲望上,一個「心靈交流」的互相運作出現在所有它的錯綜複雜中。

In the carnal act, we taint the limit of our being even while, in the process tainting ourselves, we cross it.

在肉身的行動裏,我們污染我們生命實存的極限,即使我們跨越過這個極限,
在污染我們自己的過程。

THE SOVEREIGN desire of beings is what is beyond being. Anguish is the feeling of danger related to this inexhaustible expectation.

生命實存的統治欲望,就是超越生命實存的東西。痛苦是跟永無窮盡的期望的危險的感覺。

In the realm of sensuality, a being of flesh is the object of desire. Although, in that being, what attracts isn’t immediate being but a wound, a break in the body’s integrity, the orifice of filth. This wound doesn’t precisely risk life–only life’s integrity and its purity.
在感官的領域,一個肉身的生命實存就是欲望的目標。雖然在那個生命實存,吸引人的東西,並不是當下的生命實存,而是一種創傷,一種在身體的尊嚴的中斷,骯髒的洞口。這個創傷確實並沒有冒生命的危險,而只是冒生命的尊嚴與它的純淨。

It doesn’t kill, it sullies. What is disclosed in defilement doesn’t differ substantially from what is revealed in death–the dead body and excreted matter are both expressive of nothingness, while the dead body in addition participates in filth. Excrement is the dead part of me I have to get rid of, by making it disappear, finally annihilating it. In sensuality as in death, moreover, nothingness in itself isn’t what attracts us.

 

它並沒有殺戮,它只是沾汙。在沾汙中被顯露的,實質上跟在死亡裏被揭露的沒有什麼兩樣。死掉的身體跟被排放的糞便,兩者都表達空無。除外,死掉的身體參與骯髒。糞便是我的死掉的部分。我必須排除它,讓它消失,最後消滅它。而且,在感官裏,如同在死亡裏,空無的本身,並不是吸引我們的東西。

What captivates us about death, leaving us overwhelmed but silently possessed of a feeling of sacredness or voidness, isn’t the dead body as such. If we see (or see in our imaginations) the horror of death as an actuality–the cadaver plain and simple, and its decay— we experience only disgust. The high-minded respect, calmness, even the gentle reverence with which we offer tribute, is related to artificial aspects. Hence the apparent serenity of a dead person whose jaw a couple of hours earlier was wrapped shut.

關於死亡,吸引我們的東西,並不是死去的身體本身。它使我們被壓倒,但是默默擁有一種神聖或是空無的感覺。假如我們看見,(或是使用我們的想像看見),死亡的恐懼,純然作為屍首及其腐爛的現實,我們只是經驗到厭惡。崇高心靈的尊敬,即使是溫和的尊敬,我們用以表達的尊敬,跟人為的方面是相關的。因此,這是一個死者的明顯的安詳,他的下顎早先幾個小時,被覆蓋關閉。

It’s the same with sensuality–a transposition is required in order for us to be attracted to nothingness. We’re horrified by excretions, even insurmountably disgusted. We limit ourselves to being attracted to a condition wherein a transposition is possible–to being drawn to a nakedness that we can choose to see as immediately attractive for reasons of skin tone or formal purity.

對於感官也是一樣—它需要被轉換,為了讓我們被吸引到空無。我們被糞便所驚嚇,甚至感到厭惡萬分。我們限制我們自己被吸引到一種情況。在那個情況,轉換是可能的。我們限制我們自己被吸引到一種赤裸。我們選擇將這種赤裸,看著為立即迷人的東西,因為皮膚的色調或整齊的純淨。

The obscenity of bodies derives from a disgust with excretion, put aside out of shame, while at the same time we ignore the formal ugliness of the organs. Obscenity is a zone of nothingness we have to cross–without which beauty lacks the suspended, risked aspect that brings about our damnation. Attractive, voluptuous nakedness finally triumphs when defilement causes us to risk ourselves (though in other cases, nakedness fails because it remains ugliness wholly at the level of defilement).

身體的可憎來自對於糞便的厭惡,由於羞愧,它被擺置一邊。同時,我們忽略器官的外形上的醜陋。身體的可憎是我們必須越過的一個空無的地區。假如沒有這個地區,美麗會缺乏被懸置,被冒險的一面。這一面會導致我們的詛咒。迷人而性感的赤裸最後會戰勝,當污穢引起我們冒險自己(雖然在其他情況,赤裸會讓我們失望,因為在污染的層次,從整體來看,它依舊是醜陋的。)

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

Bataille 19

May 27, 2011

Bataille 19

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊論尼采
PART II
Summit and Decline
巔峰與衰微
II
. . . Humans are the cruelest animals. Participants in tragedies, bullfights, crucifixions–until the present they’ve been more at home on earth; when they invented hell, it was in fact their paradise. . .
—Zarathustra, “The Convalescent”

、、、人類是最殘酷的動物。人類是悲劇,鬥牛,及將耶穌釘上十字架的參與者—直到目前,人類在世間還是比較自在。當他們發明地獄,事實上,地獄就是他們的天堂。
—紮拉哲斯特拉,「康復」
IT’S IMPORTANT to me to show that with “communication” or physical lovemaking, desire takes nothingness as its object.
It’s the same with any “sacrifice.”

我必須要顯示:以「心靈交流」或是生理上的作愛,欲望接納空無作為它的客體。
就「犧牲」而言,道理也是一樣。
Sacrifice generally, and not just the sacrifice of Jesus, seems to give the feeling of crime; sacrifice is on the side of evil, evil that is necessary for good.

一般的犧牲,不僅是耶穌的犧牲,似乎給予犯罪的感覺。犧牲是在邪惡這一邊;對於善是不可或缺的邪惡。

Moreover, sacrifice is not intelligible if not regarded as the means by which humans once universally “communicated” among themselves and simultaneously “communicated” with the ghosts they understood as populating hell or heaven.

而且,犧牲並不是無法被理解,即使它沒有被認為是,人類有一度將它普遍作為彼此之間「心靈交流」的工具。又與他們瞭解的鬼魂,同時「心靈交流」,讓地獄或天堂普及化。

To clarify the links between “communication” and sin, between sacrifice and sin, I’ll suggest that as sovereign desire eats away at and feeds on our anguish, on principle this engages us in an attempt to go beyond ourselves.

為了要澄清「心靈交流」與原罪的關聯,犧牲與原罪之間的關聯,我的意思是:作為支配者,欲望侵蝕,也滋養我們的痛苦。原則上,這樣將會使我們從事超越我們自己的企圖。

The beyond of my being is first of all nothingness. This is the absence I discern in laceration and in painful feelings of lack: It reveals the presence of another person. Such a presence, however, is fully disclosed only when the other similarly leans over the edge of nothingness or falls into it (dies). “Communication” only takes place between two people who risk themselves, each lacerated and suspended, perched atop a common nothingness.

我的生命實存的超越,首先就是空無。這就是從被撕裂與欠缺的痛苦感覺裏,我覺察出來的缺席。它顯示另外一個人的存在。可是,這樣一個存在,只有當另外一個人同樣地傾靠在空無的邊緣,或是掉落到空無當中,它才會充分地被揭露。「心靈交流」只會發生在兩位自我冒險的人們之間。每一個人都被撕裂及懸置,棲居在共同的空無之上。

This way of understanding things gives a similar explanation to both sacrifice and the works of the flesh. In sacrifice, humans unite with a god by putting him to death: they put to death a divinity personified by a living existence, a human or animal victim (the means we have to unite with each other). Sacrifice itself and its participants are in some way identified with the victim. So, as the victim is being put to death, they lean over their own nothingness. At the same time they understand how their god is slipping into death. The victim’s surrender (in holocausts, the victim is burned for that reason) coincides with the blow striking the god. The gift partly frees up a “humanity” for us, and for a brief moment human beings are free to unite with the existence of their divinity, a divinity that at the same time death has brought into existence.

瞭解事情的方法,對於犧牲與肉身的運作,給予相同的解釋。從犧牲當中,人類以處死上帝的方式,跟上帝結合。他們處死一個由活生生的生命具體代表的神,一個人類或動物的犧牲者,(這是我們藉以互相結合的工具)。犧牲本身與它的參與者在某方面都認同犧性者。所以,當犧牲者正在被處死刑時,他們依靠他們自己的空無。同時,他們瞭解他們的上帝如何漸漸滑入死亡。犧牲者的屈服,(在猶太人受到大屠殺時,犧牲者因為那個理由,被焚燒),跟打擊上帝的攻擊互相巧合。這種奉獻部分替我們解放一種「人性」,有一段短暫的時期,人類自由地跟他們的神祗的存在相結合。這種神祗同時與死亡並存。

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

Bataille 18

May 26, 2011

Bataille 18

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊論尼采
PART II
Summit and Decline
I
The crucified Christ is the most sublime of all symbols–even at present.
— 1885-86

被釘上十字架的耶穌,是最崇高象徵—即使是在目前。
—1885-86
I now want to contrast, not good and evil, but the “moral summit,” which is different from the good, and the “decline,” which has nothing to do with evil and whose necessity determines, on the contrary, modalities of the good.

我現在想要對比,不是善於惡,而是「道德巔峰」。這迴異於善,及「衰微」。「衰微」跟邪惡根本沒有關係,相反地,衰微的必要性,跟善相輔相成。
The summit corresponds to excess, to an exuberance of forces. It brings about a maximum of tragic intensity. It relates to measureless expenditures of energy and is a violation of the integrity of individual beings. It is thus closer to evil than to good.

巔峰對應於過度,對應於力量的飽滿。巔峰促成悲劇張力的極致。巔峰跟精力都無窮耗費息息相關,違抗個別人類的尊嚴。巔峰因此更加靠近與惡,而不是善。
The decline–corresponding to moments of exhaustion and fatigue–gives all value to concerns for preserving and enriching the individual. From it come rules of morality.

對應於窮盡與疲憊的時刻,衰微極力推崇對於保持及豐富個人的關心。道德的規則就來自衰微。

To begin with, I will show how the summit of Christ on the cross is an extremely equivocal expression of evil.

首先,我將顯示,耶穌在十字架上的巔峰,是惡的極端模棱兩可的表達。

THE KILLING of Jesus Christ is held by Christians as a group to be evil.
It is the greatest sin ever committed.
It even possesses an unlimited nature. Criminals are not the only actors in this drama, since the fault devolves on all humans. Insofar as someone does evil (every one of us being required to do evil), that person puts Christ on the cross.
對於基督耶穌的殺害,由基督徒來執行,作為惡的圖體。
那是有史以來犯過的最大的原罪。
那個原罪甚至擁有一個無限的特質。犯罪者並不僅是這個戲劇的演員,因為錯誤移轉給所有的人類。如同某人犯了惡行(我們每一個人都被要求從事惡行),那個人將耶穌放上十字架。
Pilate’s executioners crucified Jesus, though the God they nailed to the cross was put to death as a sacrifice. Crime is the agent of this sacrifice, a crime that sinners since Adam have infinitely committed. The loathesomeness concealed in human life (everything tainted and impossible carried in its secret places, with its evil condensed in its stench) has so successfully violated good that nothing close to it can be imagined.

皮拉多的劊子手將耶穌釘上十字架,雖然他們釘上十字架的上帝,是被處死刑,作為犧牲。罪是這個犧性的代理者,自從業當以來的原罪者曾經不斷地犯這個罪。對於某人的憎惡,被隱藏在人類的生命裏,(每一樣受到污染及不可能的事情,都在秘密的地方被執行,它的邪惡被濃縮在它的惡臭裏),這種憎惡曾經如此成功地違抗善,以致於靠近它的東西,哪堪被想像?

The killing of Christ injures the being of God.
It looks as if creatures couldn’t communicate with their Creator except through a wound that lacerates integrity.
The wound is intended and desired by God.
The humans who did this are not less guilty.

對於耶穌的殺害傷害到上帝的實存。
看起來好像人作為動物無法跟他們的創世主溝通,除了透過撕裂尊嚴的創傷。
這個創傷是上帝所意圖,所欲望。
從事這個創傷的人類,同樣是有罪。

On the other hand–and this is not the least strange–the guilt is a wound lacerating the integrity of every guilty being.

在另一方面,這絲毫不奇怪,罪是一種撕裂每一位犯罪者的尊嚴的創傷。

In this way God (wounded by human guilt) and human beings (wounded by their own guilt with respect to God), find, if painfully, a unity that seems to be their purpose.

以這種方式,上帝(被人類的罪所創傷)與人類(被他們自己對於上帝的罪所創傷),彼此找到一致,雖然是令人痛苦地找到。這個一致似乎適合他們的用途。

If human beings had kept their own integrity and hadn’t sinned, God on one hand and human beings on the other would have persevered in their respective isolation. A night of death wherein Creator and creatures bled together and lacerated each other and on all sides, were challenged at the extreme limits of shame: that is what was required for their communion.
假如人類當時維持他們自己的尊嚴,沒有犯原罪,一方面是上帝,另一方面是人類,他們本來會以他們個別的孤立持續下去。一個死亡的夜晚,創世主及作為動物的人一起流血,互相創傷。從各個角度來看,他們在極端的羞愧極限受到質疑。那就是為什麼他們被要求要彼此心靈交流。
Thus “communication,” without which nothing exists for us, is guaranteed by crime. “Communication” is love, and love taints those whom it unites.

因此,「心靈交流」的保證,是因為羞愧。假如沒有這個心靈交流,沒有一樣東西為我們而存在。「心靈交流」是愛,愛污染那些愛所聯繫的人。

In the elevation upon a cross, humankind attains a summit of evil. But it’s exactly from having attained it that humanity ceases being separate from God. So clearly the “communication” of human beings is guaranteed by evil. Without evil, human existence would turn in upon itself, would be enclosed as a zone of independence: And indeed an absence of “communication”–empty loneliness–would certainly be the greater evil.

在十字架上的莊嚴,人類獲得惡的巔峰。確實是因為獲得惡的巔峰,人類不再跟上帝分開。所以,顯而易見的,人類的「心靈交流」,是受到惡的保證。假如沒有惡,人類的存在會完全專注自己,會被封閉作為一個獨立的地區。的確,「心靈交流」的欠缺,也就是空無的孤獨,將確實是最大的惡。

The position of human beings evokes sympathy.
They’re driven to “communicate” (with both indefinite existence and themselves): the absence of “communication” (an egotistic folding back into self) clearly evokes the greatest condemnation. But since “communication” can’t take place without wounding or tainting our humanity, “communication” itself is guilty. However the good is construed, it’s the good of individuals–but by wanting to attain it (at night and through evil) we are impelled to question the very individuals in relation to whom we had sought it.

人類的處境博取同情。
他們被迫要「心靈交流」(既跟無限的存在,也跟他們自己):「心靈交流」的欠缺(自我中心又褶疊回到自我),顯而易見地會招致最大的譴責。但是既然「心靈交流」若是沒有創傷或是污染我們的人性,就無法發生,「心靈交流」本身就是一種罪。可是,善被解釋,那就是個人的善。但是因為想要獲得善,(在夜晚,並且透過惡),我們被驅使質疑這些個人,我們曾經尋求跟這些個人從事「心靈交流」。

A fundamental principle is expressed as follows:
“Communication” cannot proceed from one full and intact individual to another. It requires individuals whose separate existence in themselves is risked, placed at the limit of death and nothingness; the moral summit is the moment of risk taking, it is a being suspended in the beyond of oneself, at the limit of nothingness.

一條基本的原則被表達如下:
「心靈交流」無法從充實而完整的個人繼續前進到另一位個人。它要求個人的分開存在本身瀕臨危險,被處於死亡與空無的極限。道德的巔峰就是冒險的時刻,這是一種生命的實存,被懸置在自我的超越,在空無的極限。

雄伯譯
32hsiung2@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

Bataille 17

May 25, 2011

Bataille 17

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊論尼采
PART II
Summit and Decline

Here, no one will slip in and follow you. Your steps have of themselves blotted out the path behind you, and above your path is inscribed–Impossible!
— Zarathustra, “The Traveler”

在此,沒有人會過來跟隨你。你的腳步本身已經抹除跟隨你的途徑,而你前方的途徑卻銘記:不可能!
—紮拉哲斯特拉 「旅者」

THE QUESTIONS that I want to raise deal with good and evil in reference to being, or beings.
我要提出的問題是處理善與惡,有關個人生命實存,或人類實存。
Good is given first as the good of the individual. Evil seems to be a bias that obviously acts against this or that given individual. Possibly, good is respect for individuals and evil their violation. If these judgments make sense, I can derive them from my feelings.
善首先被給予,作為個人的善行。邪惡似乎是一種偏見,明顯地跟個人所被給予的這個或個善行互相牴觸。
On the contrary, good relates to having contempt for the interest of beings in themselves. According to this secondary conception (secondary, though remaining part of the totality of emotions) evil would be the existence of individuals–insofar as this implies their separation.

相反地,跟善相關的是藐視人類本身的利益。依照這第二個觀念(算是第二個,雖然它仍然是情感的整體的部分)邪惡將會是個人的存在—因為這意味著他們的分離。
Reconciliation between these conflicting forms seems simple: good would be the interest of others.

在這些衝突的形式之間的和諧似乎很簡單:善將是別人的利益。
So there is the possibility that all morality might rest on equivocation and derives from shifts.

所以很有可能的是:一切道德可能依靠模棱兩可,從轉變獲得。
But before coming to the questions this raises, I will look at the opposition from another angle.

但是在探討這樣所引起的問題之前,我將會從另外一個角度,來看對立面。

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

Bataille 15

May 23, 2011

Bataille 15

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊論尼采
Part I
Mr. Nietzsche
IV
Nothing speaks as vividly to our hearts as these sprightly melodies with their absolute sadness.
—1888
悲傷至極的那些輕佻旋律,撩撥心靈,最為淒美。
“YOU BLAME this sovereign spirit, a spirit that for the present suffices unto itself, you blame it for being well protected, for being fortified against sudden attack. You blame it for the walls surrounding it, for the mysteries within it–though still you glance curiously through the golden bars that surround its domain–fascinated and interested. For the hints of unknown perfumes are drifting mockingly across your face, disclosing something of the secret gardens and delights.” ( The Will to Power)

「你們責怪我這個君臨精神,目前充足自給。你們責怪它,因為備受保護,因為捍衛森嚴,無法突擊。你們責怪它,四周城牆堅固,因為裏面神秘重重—雖然你們好奇地透過環繞周圍的黃金般欄杆瞥見—你們感到著迷而興趣。因為未知其名的香水馥郁四溢,挑撥你的臉龐,洩漏某件秘密花園與喜悅。」(權力意志)
“There is a false appearance of cheer against which nothing can be done; but adopting it, one has to be finally satisfied with it. We who have taken refuge in happiness, who in a certain sense need the noon and its wild excesses of sunlight, who sit by the edge of the road to watch life go by like a procession of masqueraders or a drama wherein we go mad–doesn’t it appear that we’re aware of our fear of something? Something in us breaks easily. Do we fear youthful and destructive hands? Is it to avoid chance that we take refuge in life, in its brilliance, in its falsity and superficiality, in its shiny lies?
「有一種虛假的歡慶表像,我們對之無可奈何。但是一旦接納它,我們最後只有對它心滿意足。我們已經躲避於歡樂當中,在某種意義,我們需要正午及其強烈的炎熱陽光,我們端坐道路邊緣,觀看生命過去,就像化妝舞會的行列,或讓我們歡狂的戲劇—似乎,我們難道不知道我們對於某件東西的恐懼?我們內在的某件東西脆弱易破。我們害怕年輕而具毀滅性的手?我們躲避于生命,于其輝煌,於其虛假及浮淺,於其璨爛的謊言,就是要避免這個機率?」
If we seem light-hearted, is it from being infinitely sad? We are serious because we know something of the abyss–and is this why we erect barriers to that seriousness? We laugh within ourselves at those with a taste for melancholy, whom we suspect of lacking depth–alas, we envy them as we deride them, since we aren’t happy enough to allow them their delicate misery. We’re compelled to flee the barest hints of sadness–our hell and our darkness are always too near. There is something we know that we dread, something we don’t want to be on good terms with; the faith we have makes us tremble, its murmurings cause us to grow pale–and those who don’t believe in that faith seem happy to us.

假如我們顯得輕佻,難道是由於無限悲傷?我們認真,因為我們知道某件深淵的東西—這難道就是為什麼對那種認真豎立阻礙?我們內心哈哈大笑,對於那些帶有憂鬱品味的人,物們懷疑他們欠缺深度感覺—啊,我們一邊嘲笑他們,一邊羡慕他們。因為我們並沒有足夠快樂,容許他們承受他們弱不禁風的悲慘。我們被迫逃離悲傷的些微暗示—我們的地獄跟我們黑暗總是窺伺左右—有某件我們知道的東西,我們害怕,某件我們不想要跟它和諧相處的東西。我們擁有的信仰,讓我們顫慄,它的呢喃聲讓我們臉色變得蒼白—我們覺得,那些不相信那種信仰的人似乎是快樂的。

We turn aside from the sight of misery, stop our ears to the lamentations of suffering; and pity would break us, if we didn’t have the secret of toughening ourselves. Stay with us in your courage, oh you mocking indifference! Cool us, ye winds blowing from the glaciers! We’ll no longer take things to heart–we’re choosing as our supreme god and redeemer: the mask.” ( The Will to Power)
對於悲傷的景象,我們轉身不顧,閉耳不聞痛苦的悲嚎。假如我們沒有堅強我們自己的秘密,悲憫之心會毀滅我們。請你勇敢地跟我們同在,喔,你這種嘲笑的冷漠!讓我們冷爽,你這位從冰原吹拂過去的風!我們不再將事情掛念在心—我們選擇假面具作為我們崇高的神祗及救贖者。」 (權力意志)

“The supreme cosmic discourse: ‘I am cruelty, trickery,’ etc., etc. Mocking our fear of assuming responsibility for mistakes (mocking a creator) or for any pain. More malicious than ever before etc. This is a supreme way of taking pleasure in our own work; wrecking it so as to be able to reconstruct it again and again. It’s a new triumph over death, pain, obliteration.” ( The Will to Power)

「崇高的宇宙的訊息是:「我殘酷!我戲謔!等等。」嘲笑我們的恐懼,恐懼因為錯誤而負責,(嘲笑我們作為一位創造者),或恐懼因為痛苦而負責。宇宙的訊息比起以前,更加惡意,等等。這是一個崇高的方式,歡樂於我們自己的工作,破壞它,為了要能夠一再地重建它。這是一種新的勝利,克服死亡,痛苦及被抹除。」 (權力意志)
“‘Be sure! From now on I will take interest only in necessity! Be sure: amor fati will be my supreme love!'”–There exists the possibility you’ll go that far; though first you will have to show some interest in the Furies. And I declare that their serpents make me hesitate. –“‘What do you know about the Furies? The Furies, isn’t that just a derogatory name for the Graces?–He’s out of his mind!” ( The Will to Power)

「要確定!從現在開始,我將只對需要感到興趣!要確定:命運之愛將是我崇高的愛!」—你們將必須走那麼遠,這種可能性是存在的。雖然首先你們將必須顯示某種的興趣,對於復仇女神。然後我宣稱,復仇女神的蛇使我躊躇不前—「你們對於復仇女神瞭解多少?復仇女神,難道不就是上帝的恩典的貶抑名稱?—上帝發瘋了!」 (權力意志)
“Indicating the power and confidence obtained by showing that ‘I’ve unlearned fear’; in place of mistrust and doubt, trust our instincts; each person loving and honoring himself or herself in wisdom and even absurdity; partly as a fool, partly as a god; not being a figure of woe or an owl; or a serpent . . .” ( The Will to Power)

「我以顯示「我已經忘懷恐懼」,來指示我獲得的力量跟信心。讓我們信任我們的本能,來代替不信任與懷疑。讓我們信任每個人以智慧,甚至以荒謬,熱愛自己,尊重自己的人;他們有點像是傻瓜,又有點像是神祗。他們不是災難的人物,或是老鷹,或是蛇、、、」 (權力意志)

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

Bataille 14

May 22, 2011

Bataille 14

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊論尼采
Part I
Mr. Nietzsche
III b
Strolling with art lovers through the galleries and across the polished wooden floors in the museum of possibilities, inside of us we eventually kill off whatever isn’t grossly political, confining it to sumptuous dated and labeled illusions.
跟藝術愛好者一同流覽美術陳列館,並且行經「未來展望」的博物館的光滑地板,我們最後從我們內心,抹除一切跟強烈政治無關的東西,將它限制於日期及標籤五花八門的幻想裏面。

Only when shame brings this home to us do we realize it. To live out possibility to the utmost means many will have to change–taking it on as something outside of them, no longer depending on any one of them.
只有當羞愧之感讓我們刻骨銘心,我們才體會它。要將未來的展望實踐到底,意味著我們必須改變—接受未來展望當著述某件外在於自身的某件東西,不再是依靠他們的本身。
Nietzsche never doubted that if the possibility he recommended was going to exist, it would require community.
尼采從沒有懷疑,即使他所推薦的未來展望,將會存在,那個展望還是需要社會。
Desire for community was constantly on his mind.
對於社會的欲望不斷地浮現在他心頭。
He wrote, “Intimacy with great thinking is unbearable. I seek and call out to those to whom I can communicate such thinking without bringing about their deaths. “Without finding them, he sought souls who would be “deep enough.” He had to resign himself, content himself with saying: “When a challenge like this rises from the soul’s depths, not to hear the sound of a reply is a terrifying experience, and possibly even the most tenacious perish from it. It freed me from my ties with living men.”
他寫道:「對於偉大思想的親近,令人難以忍受。我尋求並且大聲呼喊,對於我能夠跟他們溝通如此思想的人,但是又不致於導致他們的死亡。」即使沒有找到他們,他尋找到願意從事「深刻思想」的靈魂。他必須順服他自己,滿足於這樣說:「當像這樣的挑戰從靈魂深處出現,沒有聽到回答的聲音,是一個可怕的經驗,甚至會因為這樣而陷入萬劫不復的毀滅。它替我解除跟活生生的人類的瓜葛。」
Numerous observations express his suffering . . .
無數的觀察表達出他的痛苦、、、
“You’re preparing for a time when you’ll have to speak. Perhaps at that point you will be ashamed of speaking, just as you sometimes are of writing. You may still have to interpret yourself–and is it possible your actions and abstentions won’t suffice to communicate yourself? There will come a cultural era in which to read at all will be construed as bad taste; there will be no reason to blush when you are read in that future age; while at present when you are called a writer, you’re insulted; and whoever praises you on account of your stories reveals a lack of tact, creating a gap between you and him; and it never crosses your mind that this glorification is in fact humiliation. I know what the present-day condition of the reader’s soul is; but beware of your wish to expend efforts on that state, to go to any trouble to produce it!
你正在準備一個你們將必須講話的時機。或許,在那個時刻,你將會感到慚愧於講話。正如你有時慚愧於寫作。你可能必須要解釋你自己—你的行動跟自我節制並不足以溝通你自己,這是可能的嗎?一個文化的時代將會來臨,在那時,閱讀本身將會被解釋成為不良嗜好。在那個未來的時代,你才被閱讀,也就沒有什麼令人臉紅的理由。目前,當你被稱為是一位作家,你是被羞辱。任何因為你寫的故事而讚美你的人,顯示他們說話欠缺技巧,在你於他之間,製造鴻溝。你從來不會想到:榮耀事實上是一種羞辱。我知道,讀者的靈魂的目前的狀況是什麼樣子,但是請小心,不要想要對那種狀況勞神費力,或花費任何心力去改正它。
“Men who possess a destiny, those who by going forth take on a destiny, the whole breed of relentless drudges, oh, don’t they long for rest now and then! They yearn for the strong hearts and sturdy necks that (for a few hours at least) take away the weight pressing down upon them! But how vain that desire! . . . They wait, and nothing of what takes place around them responds to their attention. No one comes to meet them with even the smallest portion of their own suffering and excitement. No one suspects what they put into their waiting . . . Finally, further along, they learn this elementary bit of wisdom: stop waiting. And a second lesson: be congenial, be modest, take everything in stride . . . That is, be a bit more relaxed than has been the case up to now.” ( The Will to Power)
「擁有命運的人,那些出發去擔負起命運的那些人,持續不斷勞苦從事的那些人,哦!他們難道從來不渴望休息!他們渴望強烈的心跟強壯的脖子,(至少幾個小時也好),會帶走壓迫在他們身上的重擔!但是那種欲望是多麽的徒勞!他們等待,可是他們四周發生的事情,沒有一樣回應他們的專注努力。沒有人前來跟他們相會,哪怕僅是帶著些微的他們自身的痛苦或興奮。沒有覺察到他們對於等待付出的期盼、、、最後,等待得更久,他們學會這個基本的智慧:停止等待。第二個教訓是:學會同情,學會謙虛,對於每一件事大而化之、、、換句話說,學會比迄今所表現的樣子更加豁達。」 (權力意志)

My life with Nietzsche as a companion is a community. My book is this community.

I take the following few lines very much to heart:
我以尼采作為同伴的的生活,是一個社會。我的書就是這個社會。
我將底下幾行牢記在心:
“I don’t desire to become a saint, I prefer being taken for a fool . . . And perhaps I am a fool . . . But all the same–though not ‘all the same,’ since nothing has ever been as deceptive as a saint–the truth speaks from my mouth . . .”
「我並不渴望成為聖人,我寧願被人當作是一位傻瓜、、、或許我就是一位傻瓜、、、但是照常的—雖然也不見得是「照常」,因為比起任何東西,聖人的欺騙是最大的—真理從我的嘴中說出、、、」
I am not about to rip masks off anyone . . .
What do we in fact know about Mr. Nietzsche?
Constrained to sickness and silence . . . loathing the Christians . . . And we won’t mention the others! . . .
And then . . . there are so few of us!
我沒有要將任何人的假面具撕破、、、
關於尼采先生,我們事實上懂得多少?
他被壓制成為疾病及沉默、、、他厭惡基督教徒、、、其餘的部分,我們就不用再提了!
然後,我們的同伴是如此的稀少!

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

Bataille 13

May 21, 2011

Bataille 13

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊論尼采
Part I
Mr. Nietzsche
III
. . . the heights where you find him link him in friendship to recluses, to the unrecognized of all times.

、、、你們找到他的高處,將他以友誼跟隱士聯想在一起,跟自古以來隱名埋姓的人聯想在一起。
— 1882-85
“RECLUSES AMONG recluses, where will we be then? Since it is certainly the case that that’s where, because of science, we’ll some day be. Where will human companions be found? It used to be we would look for a king, father, a judge for us all–since we needed authentic kings, fathers, judges. Later on we’ll seek a friend, since human beings will have become splendid autonomous systems, though remaining alone. Mythological instinct will then go looking for a friend.” ( The Will to Power)
「隱士中的隱士,那麼我們將會在哪里?這確實是有朝一日,因為科學,我們將會有身置何處的情況。到何處尋求人類當同伴?以前是我們尋找一位國王,父親,法官給予我們大家。因為我們需要真誠的國王,父親及法官。後來,我們將尋求一位朋友,因為人類將會成為輝煌的自主的系統,雖然始終是孤單。神話的本能將會去尋找一朋友。」 (權力意志)

“We’ll make philosophy a dangerous thing, change the idea of it, teach a philosophy that is dangerous to life; what better service can be rendered to philosophy? The more expensive the idea, the more it will be cherished. If we unhesitatingly sacrifice ourselves to notions of ‘God,’ ‘Country,’ and ‘Freedom,’ and if all of history is the smoke surrounding this kind of sacrifice, how can we show the primacy of the concept of ‘philosophy’ over popular concepts like ‘God,’ ‘Country,’ and ‘Freedom,’ except by making the former more expensive than the latter–showing that it demands still greater hecatombs?” ( The Will to Power)
「我們將會使哲學成為一件危險的事情,改變事情的觀念,教導一門對於生命危險的哲學,對於哲學我們還能夠提供什麼更好的服務?這個觀念越是昂貴,它越會被珍惜。假如我們毫不猶豫地犧牲自己,奉獻給上帝,國家及自由的觀念,假如所有的歷史都是環繞這種犧牲的煙幕,我們如何能夠顯示哲學的觀念優先于諸如上帝,國家及自由的觀念?除了將是將前者表現得比後者更加昂貴,顯示:前者要求更大的獻祭?」 ( 權力意志)

If it were ever entertained, this proposal might prove interesting. With no one in the offing wanting to die for it, however, Nietzsche’s doctrine is null and void.

假如有人懷抱這種建議,這個建議將證明很有趣。可是,由於在可預見的未來,並沒有人想要為這個建議而死,尼采的信念空無價值。

If I ever have occasion to write out my last words in blood, I’ll write this: “Everything I lived, said, or wrote–everything I loved–I considered communication. How could I live my life otherwise? Living this recluse’s life, speaking in a desert of isolated readers, accepting the buoyant touch of writing! My accomplishment, its sum total, is to have taken risks and to have my sentences fall like the victims of war now lying in the fields.” I want people to laugh, shrug their shoulders, and say, “He’s having fun at our expense, he’s alive.” True, I live on, even now am full of life, though I declare, “If you find me reluctant to take risks in this book, throw it away; if on the other hand, when you read me you find nothing to risk yourself, then listen: Throughout your life up until your death, your reading will only corrupt you . . . and you’ll stink with corruption.”
假如我有機會用血液寫出我最後的文字,我會這樣寫:「每一樣我活過,說過,或寫過的東西—每一樣我愛過的東西—我認為就是溝通。我如何能以其他的方式來活過我的人生?我過著這種隱士的生活,在孤立的讀者沙漠裏言說,接受寫作給予我的愉悅的感動!我的成就,成就的總數,本來就應該冒險,讓我的句子像躺在沙場上的戰爭的受害者一般倒下。」我要人們哈哈大笑,聳聳肩膀,然後說:「他以我們為代價,而獲得歡樂,他活得昂揚!」的確,我繼續活著,即使現在都充滿活力,雖然我宣稱,「假如你們發現我在這本書裏猶豫不敢冒險,就將此書丟掉。假如在另一方面,當你們閱讀我時,你們找不到任何東西讓你冒險,那麼請聆聽;從你的終生,直到死亡,你的閱讀只是讓你腐敗、、、你將會隨著腐敗而發臭。」

“THE TYPE OF MY DISCIPLES–For any of those in whom I take an interest I wish only suffering, abandonment, sickness, ill treatment and disgrace; I don’t want them spared the profound contempt for self or the martyrdom that is mistrust of self; they haven’t stirred me to pity . . .” ( The Will to Power)

「我的門徒的類型—對於任何我感到興趣的人,我只希望痛苦,放棄,疾病,虐待及羞辱。我不想要他們被赦免對於自我的深刻藐視,或是赦免對於自我的不信任的折磨。他們從不曾引起我的同情、、、」 (權力意志)
Nothing human necessitates a community of those desiring humanness. Anything taking us down that road will require combined efforts–or at least continuity from one person to the next–not limiting ourselves to the possibilities of a single person. To cut my ties with what surrounds me makes this solitude of mine a mistake. A life is only a link in the chain. I want other people to continue the experience begun by those before me and dedicate themselves like me and the others before me to this–to go to the furthest reaches of the possible.

人性的需求,並不一定需要那些渴望人性的那些人的社會。任何將我們帶下這條途徑的東西,會要求共同的努力—至少,從一個人到另一個人繼續下去。不要將我們自己限制于單一個人的可能性。 切斷我跟環繞我的東西,會使我的這個孤獨成為一種錯誤。生命僅是鎖鏈的一環。我要其他的人繼續在我之前那些人的這個經驗,然後他們像我及我之前的那些人一樣,奉獻他們自己於這個目標:邁向可能性的最深淵。
Sentences will be consigned to museums if the emptiness in writing persists.
這些句子將會交托給予博物館,假如寫作的空無持續下去。
Currently we take pride in this–that nothing can be understood till first of all deformed, emptied of content, by one of two mechanisms–propaganda and writing!
目前,我們以這一點感到自傲:直到首先有東西被兩樣機制之一,宣傳與寫作,扭曲變形,空掉內容,才可能有東西會被瞭解。
Like a woman, possibility, makes demands, makes a person go all the way.
像一個女人,可能性會有所要求,會使一個人忙個不停。

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

Bataille 12

May 20, 2011

Bataille 12

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊論尼采
Part I
Mr. Nietzsche

II
AN UNLUCKY incident gives me a feeling of sin: I don’t have any right to run out of luck!
Breaking the moral law was necessary to experience that urgency. (Compared to the strictness of this attitude, wasn’t the old morality simple?)
Now begins a difficult and unrelenting journey–the quest for the most distant possibility.

一個不幸事件給我一種原罪的感覺:我沒有權利將我的好運耗盡。
突破道德法則是需要的,為了經驗那種迫切性。(跟這種態度的嚴格比較起來,古老的道德律難道不是簡單?)
現在開始一段困難而堅定的旅程—追求最遙不可及的可能性。

The idea of a morality that couldn’t conquer the possible beyond good, wouldn’t such an idea be ridiculous?
道德律的觀念,若是無法克服超越善待的可能性,這樣的觀念難道不是荒謬可笑嗎?
“To deny worth, but to do what surpasses all praise or (for that matter) understanding.” ( The Will to Power)
「否認價值,但是從事超越各種讚賞事情,或(就那件事情而言)超越瞭解的事情。」
(權力意志)
“If we want to create, we have to credit ourselves with much more freedom than previously was given us and thus free ourselves of morality and bring liveliness to our celebrations. (Intimations of the future! To celebrate the future and not the past! To invent the myth of this future! To live in hopefulness!) Blessed moments! But then: let the curtain fall, and let us bring our thinking back to solid goals near at hand!” ( The Will to Power)

「假如我們想要創造,我們必須推崇我們自己,擁有更多的自由,比先前所被給予我們的,然後將我們自己從道德律解放出來,將生命活力帶到慶祝當中。(對於未來的宣告!慶祝未來,而不是過去!杜撰這個未來的神話!生活在希望當中!)這些時刻有福了!但是然後讓這個窗簾垂落下來,讓我們將我們的思想帶回手邊具體的目標!」 ( 權力意志)
The future: not a prolonging of the self through time but the occurrence of surpassing, going further than the limits reached.
未來:不是自我經歷時間的延長,而是超越的發生,前進到比到達的極限還遠。

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

Bataille 11

May 20, 2011

Bataille 11

Bataille on Nietzsche
巴岱伊論尼采
_____________________________________________________________________
PART I
Mr. Nietzsche

So let’s leave Mr. Nietzsche and go on. . .
— Gay Science

這樣,就讓我們離開尼采,繼續前進
—歡愉的智慧
I
I live–if I choose to see things this way–among a curious race that sees earth, its chance events and the vast interconnectedness of animals, mammals, and insects not so much in relation to themselves–or the necessities limiting them–but in relation to the unlimited, lost, and unintelligible aspect of the skies. Theoretically, for us happy beings, Mr. Nietzsche is a secondary problem . . . Though there exists. . .
我活著—假如我選擇以這種方式看事情—我生活在一個好奇的民族當中。他們看待地球,地球的偶發事件及動物、哺乳動物及昆蟲的廣大的互相交會,不是跟它們自己的交會,或是跟他們受限的需要交會,而是跟天空那些無限,迷失,及無法理解的面向交會。理論上,就我們快樂的人類而言,尼采先生是一個次要的問題、、、雖然存在著、、、

IT’S OBVIOUS such happy beings aren’t that much in evidence, I must quickly add.
Except for a few exceptions, my company on earth is mostly Nietzsche . . .
Blake or Rimbaud are ponderous and touchy. Proust’s limitation is his innocence, his ignorance of the winds that blow from the outside.
Nietzsche is the only one to support me: he says we. If community doesn’t exist, Mr. Nietzsche is a philosopher.
顯而易見的,快樂的人並沒有那麼顯見。我必須趕快補充說。
除了少數例外,我的大部分同伴都是尼采式的。
佈雷克,或藍波都是沉悶而敏感。普魯斯特的限制在於他的純真,他對於從外界吹進的風一無所知。
尼采是唯一支持我的人。他說「我們」。即使社會不存在,尼采先生還是一位哲學家。

“If from the death of God,” he says speaking to me, “we don’t fashion a major renunciation and perpetual victory over ourselves, we’ll have to pay for that loss” ( The Will to Power).
That sentence has a meaning–I immediately saw what it was driving at.
「假如從上帝之死,」他跟我這樣說,「我們對於我們自己,並沒有形成一個主要的放棄及永久的勝利。我們必須因為那個喪失而付出代價。」
(權力意志)
這個句子具有意義—我立刻看出它意指著什麼。

We can’t rely on anything.
Except ourselves.
Ludicrous responsibility devolves on us, overwhelms us.
In every regard, right up to the present, people always have relied on each other–or God.
我們不能夠依靠任何事情。
除了我們自己。
可笑的責任移交給予我們,壓垮我們。
關於一切,一直到現在,人們總是互相依靠,或是依靠上帝。

As I write I hear rolling thunder, moaning wind: I am watching within me, sensing noise, explosions, storms moving across the land over time. In an unlimited time, unlimited sky, traversed by crashing roars, dispensing death as simply as the heart pumps blood, I feel myself born away in sharp impulses–too violent for me right now.
當我寫作時,我聽到隆隆的雷聲,哀號的風:我正在觀看我的內心,感覺出噪音,爆炸聲,暴風雨隨著時間過去越過大地。在無限的時間裏,無限的天空,被撞擊的隆隆聲跨越過,輕易地分配死亡,如同心臓輕易的抽取血液。我感覺我自己在劇烈的衝動被帶走—現在這些衝動太過強烈,我無法承受。

Through the shutters into my window comes an infinite wind, carrying with it unleashed struggles, raging disasters of the ages. And don’t I too carry within me a blood rage, a blindness satisfied by the hunger to mete out blows? How I would enjoy being a pure snarl of hatred, demanding death: the upshot being no prettier than two dogs going at it tooth and nail! Though I am tired and feverish . . . “Now the air all around is alive with the heat, earth breathing a fiery breath. Now everyone walks naked, the good and bad, side by side. And for those in love with knowledge, it’s a celebration.” (The Will to Power)
透過窗簾,無限的風進入我的窗戶,隨之而來的是沒有節制的奮鬥,幾世紀的狂虐的災難。我的內心不就是熱血奔騰,渴望要頻頻出擊,才能滿足的盲目衝動?我多麽想要享受仇恨的純粹怒吼,而要求死亡,結局的狼狽,就像兩條狗尖齒利爪地互相攻擊!雖然我身心俱疲,卻依然狂熱、、、「現在四周的空氣充滿炎熱,大地的氣息炙熱難耐。現在每個人都裸身行走,善與惡,並肩前進。對於那些熱愛知識的人,這是個慶祝。」
(權力意志)
“The profoundest thinkers aren’t those whose stars orbit cyclical pathways. To those who see inside themselves as if into the immense universe and who in themselves bear Milky Ways, the extreme irregularity of these constellations is well known; they lead directly to chaos and to a labyrinthine existence.” (Gay Science)
「星球沿著迴圈軌道運行的哲學家,並不是最深刻的哲學家。對於那些哲學家,他們看到他們內心裏面,好像看透廣裘的宇宙。他們在自己的身上,展現銀河系統。這些星座的混亂分佈是眾所周知,他們直接通往混沌,通往迷宮一般的存在。」
(歡愉的智慧)

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