Logic of Phantasy 60

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:

The Logic of Fantasy 14
幻见的逻辑
Seminar 14: Wednesday 8 March 1967

Since we should not, in such a difficult field, advance like bulls in a china shop, we have to go at it

keenly. With acting-out we have something, something to which it seems possible to draw the attention

of all those who have an experience of analysis, in a way which promises agreement. We know that

there are things called acting-out and that they have a relation to the intervention of the analyst.

在如此困难的领域，我们不应该像公牛般在瓷器店里横冲直闯，而要小心翼翼地前进。以积极行动的方式，

我们拥有某件东西，以承诺和谐的方式，似乎可以博得精神分析学界的注意。我们知道，有些被称为「觉醒

行动」的事情，它们跟精神分析师的介入有关系。

I designated the page of my Ecrits. It is in my dialogue with Jean Hippolyte, about the (8) Verneinung,

where I highlighted a very nice example of it taken from testimony that can be trusted, for it is a really

innocent testimony (it is the least that can be said!), that of Ernst Kris, in the article he wrote under the

title of "Ego psychology and interpretation in psychoanalytic therapy", Psychoanalytic Quarterly, volume

20, no. 1. I marked, per longum et latum, in this text of mine which is easy to find, (I repeat, I even gave

the page, one of the last seminars. It is in my dialogue with Jean Hippolyte, the one which follows "The

function and field of speech and language", otherwise called the Rome discourse). I highlighted there

what is involved for Kris in the fact of having – following a methodological principle which is the one that

ego psychology promotes - intervened in the field of what he calls "the surface" and that we, for our part,

will call the field of an appreciation of reality.

我指明我的「精神分析论文集」的这一页。就在我跟希伯来提对话有关「否认」。那时我强调一个我从证词得来，

值得信任的好例子，因为那时一个不作假的证词（至少可以这麽说），欧斯特、克里斯的证词。他有一文章，

1
题目是「自我心理学与精神分析治疗学的解释」，发表在「精神分析季刊」第一之一集第二十册，标示为「神

经肌肉学」，就在我的这篇文章旁边，很容易找到（我重复一遍，我以前有一次演讲，我甚至将它印发。我

个跟希伯来提对话的前面，是「言说与语言的功用与领域」，又称为「罗马的论述」）。我在文章里强调克里

斯所牵涉到的「介入」，他採用自我心理学提倡的方法论的原则，称之为「表面」，就我们而言，我们称之为

「现实界评估的领域」。

This appreciation of reality plays a part in analytic interventions. In any case, in the terms of reference of

the analyst it plays a considerable role! Not the least distortion of the theory is the one, for example,

which says that it is possible to interpret what are called the manifestations of transference, by making

the subject sense the way in which repetitions, which are supposed to constitute its essence, are

inappropriate, displaced, inadequate, with respect to what had been written, printed in black and white:

the field - not of the analytic situation - of the confinement in the analyst's office considered as

constituting (this has been written) such a simple reality! The fact of saying: "You do not see the degree

to which it is inappropriate that such and such a thing should be repeated here, in this field, where we

meet three times a week" - as if the fact of meeting three times a week was such a simple reality - has

something about it, undoubtedly, which makes one think very strongly about the definition that we have

to give of what reality is in analysis.

现实界的评估在精神分析介入方面，扮演一个角色。无论如何，以精神分析师的术语来说，它扮演的角色

非常重要！例如，对於理论的曲解，就是事关重大。它说，我们强迫主体感觉到，被认为是形成移情本质

的重复，是一种不正当、不合宜的代替心理，这样我们就可能解释所谓的移情的证明。这些话被书写下来，

白纸黑字：局限於精神分析师的办公室，（还不是局限於精神分析的情境），被认为是如此单纯的现实界

的形成要件！（这可是有文字为据的）。他还说：「你们没有看到，诸如其类的事情，在这里一再发生，是

多麽的不正当！在这个领域，我们一个星期，竟然会面三次！」好似一个星期会面三次，是如此单纯的一

个现实界，无可置疑，就会让我们强烈地想到，在精神分析学，我们必须给予真事界是什麽的定义。

In any case, it is no doubt in an analogous perspective that Mr. Kris puts himself, when, dealing with

somebody who in his, Kris's, eyes is pinpointed as accusing himself of plagiarism, having got his hands

on a document which in his, Kris's, eyes, proves manifestly that the subject is not really a plagiarist,

thinks he ought, as a "surface" intervention, articulate well and truly that he, Kris, assures him that he is

not a plagiarist; since the volume in which the subject believed he found the proof, Kris had sought and

found and that there was nothing especially original in it from which the subject, his patient, might have

profited. I would ask you to consult my text, and moreover that of Kris, and again (if you can put your

hands on it) the text of Melitta Schmideberg, who had the subject for a first period or tranche of analysis.

无论如何，这毫无疑问是克里斯夫子自况的类比观点，在克里斯的眼中，某个人被指明是控诉自己是抄袭

者，他抄袭一份文件，在克里斯眼中，显而易见，主体並不算是真的抄袭。所以，他认为他应该清楚而实

在地表达，作为一个「表面」的介入。克里斯告诉他说，他並不是一位抄袭者，因为主体以为他找到证据的

2
那一册书，克里斯曾经寻找发现，里面没有什麽特别独創的东西，主体，也就是他的个案对象，可以获的

得利益的。我要求你们去参考我的文章，以及克里斯的文章，然后再参考希米得伯的文章（假如你们拿得

到的话）。希米得伯是那位主体第一就诊时期的精神分析师。

(9) You will see in it, the absolutely exorbitant thing that is involved in taking that path to approach a

case where, quite obviously, what is essential is not that the subject is or is not really a plagiarist, but

that his whole desire is to plagiarise. This for the simple reason that it seems to him that it is only

possible to formulate something which has a value, if he has borrowed it from someone else. This is the

essential mainspring. I can schematise so firmly, because this is the mainspring.

（第九）你将在里面看到，採取那种方式接近个案，会牵涉到的绝对丰沛的东西。显而易见地，重要的並

不是，主体是否是一位抄袭者，而是他的整个欲望，就是要抄袭。理由很简单，他觉得某件有价值的东西，

他只有可能阐述，不可能創造。即使他从某人那里借来这个东西。这是重要的主流思潮。我如此坚定地描绘

它的基模，因为这是主流的思潮

In any case, after this intervention, it is Kris himself who communicates to us that after a little moment of

silence of a subject who, for Kris, acknowledges the hit, he simply states this tiny fact that for some time

now, he goes, every time he leaves Kris, to have a nice little meal of fresh brains.

无论如何，经过这样的介入后，克里斯本人跟我们表达：主体沉默一阵子后，他承认有这样的主流思潮。

他仅是陈述这个微小的事情，每一次他拜访克里斯诊所后，他就去吃一顿新鲜美味的大餐。

What is this? I do not have to say it, since, already, right at the beginning of my teaching I highlighted

the fact that this is an acting-out. In what way? In what way - which could absolutely not be articulated at

that time as I can do it now - in what way if not the following. That the oral o-object is here in a way

made present, brought in on a plate - as one might say - by the patient, in relation, in connection with

this intervention. So what?

这是什麽？我不必说出来，因为它已经在我教学演讲的开始那里。我强调，这是一种「觉醒行动」。以怎样的

方式？这个方式，当时绝对无法像我现在这样地表达，也就是如下面所述：口腔的客体，以某种的方式表

现出来，我们不妨这样说，跟这种介入有关系的病人，将它放在盘子上端出来。

So what? This of course is only of interest for us now - even though, of course, it has a permanent one

for all analysts - this is only of interest now if it allows us to advance a little into the structure.

那是什麽？现在当然只有我们对它感到興趣，虽然它对所有的精神分析师，都会有永久的价值。我们只有

现在感到興趣，因为它让我们能够更加深刻地探讨这个结构。

3
So then, we call that, acting-out. What are we going to make of this term?

我们称之为「觉醒行动」。我们如何来解释这个术语。

First of all we will not dwell, I think, on the following, which is to make the mistake of using what is called

"franglais". For me the use of "franglais", I must say - I think I have some taste for the French tongue -

does not put me out in any way. I really do not see why we should not adorn our use of the tongue by

eventually using words that do not form part of it. That does not affect me one way or the other! This, all

the more, because I am not able in any way to translate it and that it is a term in English, of

extraordinary relevance. I signal it in passing for the reason that in my eyes it is, in a way, as one might

say, a confirmation of something. Namely, that if the authors - I am not going to give you the history of

the authors who introduced it, because time is pressing on me - if the authors have used acting-out, the

term acting-out in English, well then, they knew very well what they meant and I am going to prove it for

you. Not in making use of what I believed I would find in an excellent, fundamental, philological

dictionary (that I have, of course, at home, in thirteen volumes) the New English Oxford Dictionary; no

trace of act out.

我认为，首先我们不要详述以下的内容，因为这样会犯了「法语夹杂英语外来语」的通病。对於我，「法语夹

杂英语外来语」的使用，我认为我对於法国语言固然情有独钟，但是我並不排除法语夹杂英语外来语。我真

的不明白，为什麽我们不应该採用外来的语言词汇，来增添我们对於语言使用的灵活性。那对於我，丝毫

不会有任何不良的影响！因为我不知道如何翻译这个术语，我更加有这个需要，直接引用这个有特别相关

意义的英文。换句话说，假如作者，我就不跟你们描述作者介绍它的历史，因为我的时间剩余不多。假如作

者使用「觉醒行动」，英语里的「觉醒行动」，他们知道得很清楚，那是什麽意思。我将证明给你们看。我採用

的解释，並不是我相信是一个优秀的语言学的字典「牛津英文大辞典」（当然，我家里有一套，十三册）：

没有「觉醒行动」一词。

But it was enough for me to open Webster's (which is also an admirable instrument, even though in a

single volume: (10) and which is published in America) to find at to act out the following definition that I

hope A can find ... here we are: to (I apologise for my ... for my English ... for my articulation, my

inadequate "spelling" in English) to represent, in parenthesis, as a play, story and so on, in action.

Therefore, to represent as a play on a stage, a story in action, as opposed to reading. As to act out a

scene that one has read. Therefore, as: act out (I am not saying "jouer" since it is act out, is it not, it is

not to play, huh!) a scene that one has read.

但是我打开「威伯英文辞典」（这也是一本很有用的工具书，虽然只有一大本，而且是美国出版），在「觉

醒行动」的条目下，有下列的定义，我希望某先生能够找到。它的解释是：在戏剧或故事中，再次以行动

重新出现。（抱歉我的表达，我的英文拼字，並不是很精确）。因此，再次以行动重新出现，作为舞台上

的一齣戏剧，一段故事，截然不同於在阅读当中。也就是，将我们所阅读过的场景，以行动重新出现。因此，

4
「觉醒行动」演出我们曾经阅读过的场景。（我不是说（扮演）而己，因为它已经实质演出，它不仅是要扮

演而己）。

Thus, there are two moments. You have read something.. You read Racine, you read him badly, of

course, I mean that you read him aloud in a detestable fashion. Someone here wants to show you what

it is. He acts it.

因此，有两种评论。你阅读过某些东西，你阅读过拉辛的作品，当然你详细地阅读。我的意思是，你勉为其

难地朗读出来，某个人想要给你表示它的内容。他用行动演出。

This is what to act out is.

这就是「觉醒行动」的意思。

雄伯译

springherohsiung@gmail.com
(886) 0933381945