HYSTERIA AND OBSESSIONAL NEUROSIS 癔症与妄想神经症
Although all neurotics are uniformly under the spell of repression, suffering from something unspoken which none the less continues to speak in a different realm, Lacan maintained Freud’s decomposition of the neurotic picture in a hysterical and an obsessional side.28 From the 1890s till the 1930s, Freud had experimented with a whole gamut of criteria distinguishing hysterics from obsessional neurotics, such as the time and nature of the traumatic sexual experience, constitutional factors, the moment of disease onset, the location of the symptoms, the fixated phase of libidinal development, the type of repression, and the patients’ unconscious attitudes towards sexuality.
虽然所有的神经症者都一致地受到压抑的影响,他们遭受某件没有说出的东西的痛苦。这个没有说出的东西仍然继续言说,在不同的领域。拉康维持弗洛伊德对于神经症画面的解构,处于癔症与妄想症的这一边。从1890年,直到1930年,弗洛伊德曾经试验一整套的标准,区别癔症跟妄想神经症的不同,譬如,创伤的性的经验的时间与特性,结构性的因素,疾病开始的时刻,症状的位置,力比多发展的固定的时期,压抑的种类,与病人对应性的无意识的态度。
Some of these criteria, notably the nature of the traumatic sexual experience (passive and painful in hysteria versus active and pleasurable in obsessional neurosis), he had come to reject as his theory evolved, whereas others he had suggested without detailing their impact.29 On various occasions, Freud (1918b [1914]:76; 1926d[1925]:113) had also conceded that every obsessional neurosis seems to encapsulate a hysterical nucleus, out of which it develops along complex, obscure pathways. Unlocking the mystery of obsessional neurosis thus involved the challenge of finding its formula of transformation, something for which Freud never claimed credit. Lacan dressed his own differentiation of hysteria and obsessional neurosis in his preferred conceptual garments of subject, Other, object, fantasy, desire and jouissance, without betraying his allegiance to Freud.
有一些的这些标准,特别是创伤的性的经验的癔症(癔症者的被动与令人痛苦,对比于妄想症者的主动与快乐),他逐渐排除它们,随着他的理论的进展。另一方面,他曾经建议其他的标准,但是没有详述它们的影响。在各个不同的场合,弗洛伊德也曾经承认,每个妄想症的神经症似乎总栝癔症的核心。每个妄想神经症就从癔症的核心发展出来,沿着复杂而模糊的途径。解答妄想神经症的神秘,因此牵涉到这个挑战:要找出它的转化的公式,对于这个转化的公式,弗洛伊德从来宣称予以推崇。拉康则是用他较为喜爱的观念的外衣:主体,大他者,客体,幻见,欲望与欢爽,装扮他自己对于癔症与妄想症的区别。但是拉康病没有背叛对于弗洛伊德的忠诚。
Here, Lacan’s Freudian inspiration can be inferred from his unremitting faith in the value of Freud’s case-studies of Dora (1905e[1901]), the Rat Man (1909d) and the Wolf Man (1918b[1914]), as well as from his trenchant critique of the purportedly ‘deviant’, post-Freudian accounts of hysteria and obsessional neurosis, such as the object-relations perspective espoused by Maurice Bouvet during the late 1940s and 1950s (Lacan 1994[1956–57]:26–28; 1998b[1957–58]:387–421).30
在此,拉康的获得弗洛伊德的启发,可以从头永不休止的信仰弗洛伊的个案研究的价值推论出来:“朵拉”,“鼠人”,“狼人”,以及从他的锐利地批判据说是“偏离的”后-弗洛伊德学派,他们对于癔症与妄想症的描述。譬如,莫瑞斯,博维特主张的客体关系的观点,在1940年代晚期与1950年代。
Following Freud (1909d:156), Lacan argued that the analysis of obsessional neurotics is much more demanding than that of hysterical patients, since what the analyst needs is ‘not only the plan of a reconstructed labyrinth, or even a batch of plans already drawn up’, but also ‘the general combinatory that governs their variety…[and], even more usefully, accounts for the illusions, or rather shifts of perspective to be found in the labyrinth (Lacan 1977i[1958]:266).
追随弗洛伊德之后,拉康主张,妄想神经症的分析,比起癔症病人的分析,要求严格得多。因为精神分析家所需要的东西,“不但是重新建立迷宫的计划,或甚至是一堆已经被拟定的计划,而且是统辖它们的多样态的一般组合、、、甚至更加有用地,对于幻觉的描述,或者说,在迷宫里能够被找到的观点的改变。
In keeping with Freud (1913i:319), Lacan also surmised that hysteria and obsessional neurosis are two neurotic languages, whereby the obsessional idiom is a dialect of the hysterical standard. Towards the end of his career, Lacan even adduced that the psychoanalytic treatment of all neurotics rests upon a ‘hysterisation’ of the patient, which indicates that he agreed with Freud on the hysterical core within obsessional neurosis (Lacan 1991a[1969– 70]:35–36).
虽然遵循弗洛伊德,拉康也推断,癔症与妄想神经症是两种神经症的语言。妄想神经症的词语是癔症的标准语的方言。在他事业的末期,拉康甚至补充说:精神分析对于所有的神经症的治疗,依靠病人的“成为癔症“,这指示著:拉康同意弗洛伊德,对于癔症的核心,在妄想神经症内部。
Lacan’s proposition that every neurotic subject recognizes and is being recognized by the Other (Lacan 1993[1955–56]:168) provides a good starting-point for a summary of his ideas on hysteria and obsessional neurosis.31 Throughout his seminars, Lacan explored the effects of this neurotic acknowledgement of the Other (the laws of language, the language of laws, the sociocultural rules and regulations), both on the human condition and on the structure of language itself. In a first movement, he aligned the individual’s assimilation of the symbolic order with the normal deployment of the Oedipus and castration complexes in Freud’s theory, according to which the child relinquishes its primary love-object (the mother) in favour of an identification with the father as the representative of the law (Freud 1924d; Lacan 1994[1956–57]:61, 199–230).
拉康的命题是:每个神经症的主体体认出大他者,而且正在被大他者体认。这个命题提供一个很好的出发点,作为他对于癔症与妄想神经症的观念的总结。在他的研讨班里,拉康探索这个神经症的承认大他者的影响(语言的法则,法则的语言,社会与文化的规则与规定)。一方面是依据人类的情况,另一方面则是依据语言本身的结构。在一个最初的运动里,拉康将个人的接受象征秩序,等同于弗洛伊德的理论里,伊狄浦斯与阉割情结的正常的发展。依照弗洛伊德的理论,小孩放弃它的最初的爱的客体(母亲),以迁就对于父亲的认同,作为是法则的代表。
Concurrently, Lacan reinterpreted Freud’s notion of castration —the boy’s observation that his mother lacks a penis and the ensuing fear that his own will be cut off by way of punishment for violating a prohibition—as a symbolic cut resulting from the individual’s compliance with the Other.32 According to Lacan, every society forces human beings to postpone the satisfaction of some of their drives and prohibits the expression of some drives altogether, which implies ‘that jouissance [enjoyment] is forbidden to him who speaks as such’ (Lacan 1977k [1960]:319).
同时,拉康重新解释弗洛伊德对于阉割的观念—小孩观察到,他的母亲欠缺阳具,并且随后恐惧,他自己的阳具将会被切割,作为处罚,因为他违背一个禁令—作为因为个人的同意大他者造成的象征的切割。依照拉康,每个社会都强迫人类拖延某些的冲动的满足,并且也一块禁止某些冲动的表达。这暗示着:欢爽被禁止,对于言说作为欢爽的人。
Originally defined by Freud as a perceived punishment for transgressing a symbolic law (the incest prohibition), in Lacan’s version castration became part and parcel of leading a law-abiding life. Following this symbolic cut of castration, the neurotic individual experiences both a loss of jouissance, which Lacan designated as -f, and an internal lack, which he dubbed or split subject.33 The entire operation awakens the neurotic’s desire to retrieve what is lost and to annihilate the lack. Desire and jouissance are therefore the two poles of the psychic spectrum within which the neurotic individual has to organize his life (Lacan 1998b[1957– 58]:261–317).
阉割原先被弗洛伊德定义,作为是被感知的处罚,因为逾越象征的法则(乱伦的禁令)。在拉康的版本,阉割则是成为遵守法则的生活的部分与包裹。神经症的个人遵循这个阉割的象征,并且经验到欢爽的丧失与内部的欠缺。前者,拉康指明作为是-f;后者,他称之为分裂的主体。整个的运作唤醒神经症的欲望,要重新获得丧失的东西,并且消灭这个欠缺。欲望与欢爽因此是心灵光谱的两个极端。在这心灵光谱内部,神经症的个人必须组织他的生活。
In a second movement, Lacan investigated the relationship between the neurotic’s lack (the split subject ) and the objects with which she tries to neutralize it, simultaneously satisfying her desire and reinstating the feeling of ‘fullness’. This entailed an extrapolation of Freud’s suggestion, in the final pages of his ‘Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality’ (1905d:222–230), that the objects to which a person turns in adulthood are always but substitutes for a lost primary object which can never be retrieved.
在第二个运动,拉康研究神经症者的欠缺(分裂的主体)与客体的关系。神经症者尝试用这些客体来让关系保持中立,同时又满足她的欲望,并且重新恢复“充实“的感觉。这意味着推断弗洛伊德的建议,在”性学三论文“的最后几页。一个人在成年时转向这些客体,这些客体总是仅是已经丧失的原初的客体的替代品。已经丧失的原初的客体永远无法被重新获得。
From the late 1950s Lacan conceptualized these fascinating, yet inadequate, objects which turn the neurotic individual on because he ‘reads’ their promise of fulfilment as objects a. In Seminar VI he described an object a as something which ‘satisfies no need and is itself already relative, i.e. placed in relation to the subject…The object takes the place, I would say, of what the subject is—symbolically—deprived of (Lacan 1977a[1959]:15). Again in accordance with Freud, Lacan defined an individual’s relationship with these purportedly satisfying objects as ‘fantasy’, for which he constructed the algebraic formula ? a in which ? stands for ‘desire of/for’ (Lacan 1977k[1960]:313).34
从1950年晚期,拉康将这些令人著迷,可是又不充足的客体建构成概念。这些客体让神经症者感到著迷,因为他“阅读“出它们作为客体,具有让人满足的展望。在第六研讨班,拉康描述一个小客体,作为是某件并没有满足任何需要,小客体本身总是相对价值,譬如,小客体跟主体的相对地位。我不妨说,小客体具有主体被剥夺的东西的这个位置—象征方面而言。而且,为了符合弗洛伊德,拉康定义一个人跟这些据说令人满足的客体的关系,作为是”幻见“。拉康替这个”幻见“建构一个代数的公数”S<>a“,在这个公式里,a代表”欲望所在,或欲望的目标“。