《悲剧的本质:索福克勒斯的安提戈涅之评论》三 安提贡尼处于两次死亡之间
作者: LACAN / 5766次阅读 时间: 2017年12月22日
来源: 雄伯 译

2 索福克利斯的反人本主义

From then on things move fast. The guard comes and announces that the brother has been buried. At this point I am going to draw your attention to something that reveals the importance of Sophocles's work for us.Some people have said, and I seem to remember that it is the name of one of the many works that I consulted, that Sophocles is a humanist. He is found to be human since he gives the idea of a properly human measure between a rootedness in archaic ideals represented by Aeschylus and a move toward bathos, sentimentality, criticism, and sophistry that Aristotle had already reproached Euripides with.


I don't disagree with the notion that Sophocles is in that median position,but as far as finding in him some relationship to humanism is concerned, that would be to give a wholly new meaning to the word. As for us, we consider ourselves to be at the end of the vein of humanist thought. From our point of view man is in the process of splitting apart, as if as a result of a spectral analysis, an example of which I have engaged in here in moving along the joint between the imaginary and the symbolic in which we seek out the relationship of man to the signifier, and the "splitting" it gives rise to in him. Claude Levi-Strauss is looking for something similar when he attempts to formalize the move from nature to culture or more exactly the gap between nature and culture.

我同意这个观念; 索福克利斯处于那个中间位置。但是就在他身上找到跟人本主义的关系而言,那是给予这个字词完全崭新的意义。至于我们,我们认为我们自己处于人本主义的思想的脉络的末端。从我们的观念,人是处于分裂的过程,好像由于魅影分析的结果,其中一个例子,我曾经在此探讨,沿着想象界与象征界之间的结合前进。我们在那里找出人与能指的关系,它在他身上产生这种「分裂」。克劳德、列文、史特劳斯正在寻找某件类似的东西,当他企图要正常化这个动作,从自然到文化,或者更贴切地说,处于自然与文化之间的这个差距。

It is curious to note that on the edge of humanism it is also in this analysis, in this gap of analysis, of limits, in this attitude that the race is run, that the images rise up that turn out to be the most fascinating of that whole period of history which can be dubbed humanist.


I find for example the point in the text that you have in your hands, lines 360-375, very striking; it concerns the moment when the Chorus bursts forth just after the departure of the messenger whose comic responses and shuffling movements, when he comes to announce the news that may cost him dearly, I referred to earlier. It is really terrible, the Chorus says, to see someone so obstinate about believing he believes. Believing he believes what? Something that no one for the moment has the right to imagine, that is the play of SOKGI δοκήν. That's the element I sought to emphasize in that line along with the other response: "You're playing the fool with your stories about the δόξα."

譬如,我在你们手中拥有的这个文本里发现这个点非常引人注意,在360-375行。它跟这个时刻有关系,当合唱队突然出现,在信差离开之后。信差的滑稽的反应与疾走的动作,当他前来宣佈可能让他付出代价的这个消息。我早先提到的消息。这确实是可怕的,合唱队说,看见某个如此固执的人,相信他相信。相信他相信什么?某件东西,目前没有人拥有权力想象,那就是δοκήν.的戏剧。那就是我尝试要强调的因素,在那一行,以及另外一个其他反应:「你们正在扮演那个傻瓜,用你们关于δόξα 的故事。」

That's an obvious allusion to the philosophical games of the time that focused on a theme. The scene itself is quite ridiculous, for we are not really interested in whether the guard will be skinned alive or not on account of the bad news he bears, and he in any case gets out of it with a flourish. Immediately afterwards in line 332 the Chorus breaks out in the chant that I said the other day was a celebration of mankind. It begins as follows:


πολλά τά δανό κ' ουδέν αν-

θρώπου δανότΐρον πέλβί•

The lines mean literally: "There are a lot of wonders in the world, but there is nothing more wonderful than man."


As far as LeVi-Strauss is concerned, what the Chorus says about man here is really the definition of culture as opposed to nature: man cultivates speech and the sublime sciences; he knows how to protect his dwelling place from winter frosts and from the blasts of a storm; he knows how to avoid getting wet. Yet there is a slippage here; there is, it seems to me, an undeniable irony in what follows, in the famous phrase ποντοπόρος άπορος, which has given rise to a debate on the subject of its punctuation. The accepted punctuation seems to be the following: ποντοπόρος, άπορος έπ' ουδέν ίρχ^ται το μάλλον. Ποντοπόρος means "he who knows all kinds of tricks" - man knows a lot of tricks. "Απορος is the opposite; it means when one has no resources or defenses against something. You are, I suppose, familiar with the term aporia. Άπορος means one that is "screwed." As the proverb from the Vaud region has it, "Nothing is impossible for man; what he can't do, he ignores." That's the tone of the text.

就列文、史特劳斯而言 合唱队所说的关于人,在此确是文化的定义,作为跟自然对立:人培养言说与令人敬畏的科学。他知道如何保护他的住所,免于冬天的霜雪,免除暴风雨的侵袭。他知道如何避免被雨淋湿。可是,我觉得,在此有一个失误,有一个无可否认的反讽,在后面跟随的东西,在那个著名的ποντοπόρος άπορος,。它曾经产生一场争辩,对于它的强调的主题。这个被接受的强调似乎是以下; ποντοπόρος, άπορος έπ' ουδέν ίρχ^ται το μάλλον. Ποντοπόρος .。意思是:「他知道各种的巧计」--人知道各种的巧计。"Απορος 的意思是相反。它意味着,当我们没有资源或防卫,对抗某件东西。我认为,你们对于aporia 这个术语耳熟能详。Άπορος的意思是「凭巧计赢人」。如同瓦德地区的谚语所表达,「对于人,没有一样事情是不可能的;他无法做到事前,他忽视。」那是文本的语调。

Next we have - έπ' ουδέν epxerai το μέλλον.

Έρχεται means "he advances." Έπ' ουδέν means "toward nothing." To μέλλον can be translated quite innocently as "the future"; it also means "that which must happen," but at other moments it signifies μέλλβιν, "to delay." As a result, TO μέλλον opens up a semantic field that isn't easy to identify precisely with a corresponding French term. The problem is usually solved by saying, "Since he is highly resourceful, he will never be without resources whatever he has to face." The thought strikes me as a little petty bourgeois. It's not clear that it was the poet's intention to emit such a platitude.

然后,我们拥有έπ' ουδέν epxerai το μέλλον.

Έρχεται 的意思是「他前进」。Έπ' ουδέν 的意思是「朝向空无」。Μέλλον 则是能够相当纯真地被翻译成为「未来」。它也意味着:「必须发生的事情」,但是在其他时刻,它意味着μέλλβιν, 「拖延」。结果,TO μέλλον 展开一个语意学的领域。这领域并不容易确实地认同对应的法文术语。这个问题通常这样说来解决:「因为他聪慧过人,他将永远不会欠缺机智,无论他必须面对什么。」这个思想让我印象深刻,作为是有点小布尔乔亚阶级。 诗人的意图是否要发泄陈腔滥调,则是不得而知。  

In the first place, it is difficult to disconnect the two terms that are joined at the beginning of the sentence, ποντοπόρος άπορος. I also note that later on in line 370 we find another conjunction, ύφίπολις άπολις, that is to say "he who is both above and outside the city." And this is the definition of a character generally identified, as I will explain later, with Creon, with his deformation. At the same time I am not sure that άπορος έπ' ουδέν έρχεται can be translated as "because he doesn't approach anything without resources."

首先,很困难中断句子开头被连接的这两个术语,ποντοπόρος άπορος.。我后来也注意到,在370行,我们发现另外一个连接,ύφίπολις άπολις,。换句话说,「他既是在城邦的上方,也是在外面。」这就是通常被辨认的特性的这个定义,如同我以后将会解说,用克瑞恩,用他的扭曲。同时,我并不确定,άπορος έπ' ουδέν έρχεται能够被翻译成为「因为他没有接近任何东西,而不带机智。」

It isn't at all in conformity with the genius of the Greek language in this case. Έρχεται requires that έπΌύδέν be attached to it. Έπ' agrees with έρχεται, not with άπορος. We are the ones who find there someone who is ready for everything, whereas it is literally a question of the following: "He advances toward nothing that is likely to happen, he advances and he is ποντοπόρος, "artful," but he is άπορος, always "screwed." He knows what he's doing. He always manages to cause things to come crashing down on his head.

这跟希腊语言的天才根本就不相一致。在这个情况,Έρχεται 要求,έπΌύδέν 应该被跟它连接。Έπ' agrees 跟 έρχεται, 而不是 άπορος.连接。我们发现有某个人准备接受一切事情。虽然它实质上是以下的问题:「他前进朝向可能会发生的空无,他前进,并且是有机巧的ποντοπόρος」,但是他总是「凭借机智赢人 άπορος,」。他知道,他正在做的事情。他总是成功地引起事情崩塌在他头上。

You should respond to this turning point as to something in the style of Prevert. And I will confirm that such is the case. Just afterwards one finds the line Αΐδα μόνου ψεΰζιν ουκ έπάζεται, which means that there is only one thing he can't come to terms with and that has to do with Hades. Dying is something he doesn't know how to come to terms with. The important point occurs in what follows, - νότων δ'άμηχάνων φυγάς. Having said that there is one thing that man hasn't managed to come to terms with, and that is death, the Chorus says that he has come up with an absolutely marvelous gimmick, namely, translated literally, "an escape into impossible sicknesses."

你们应该回应这个转捩点,关于某件东西,以普瑞博的风格。我将会证实情况是如此。就在以后,我们发现这行Αΐδα μόνου ψεΰζιν ουκ έπάζεται,。它的意思是:仅有一件事情,他无法妥协,他跟阴府息息相关。死亡是某件他不知道如何跟它妥协的东西。重点发生在以下的事情--νότων δ'άμηχάνων φυγάς。当人说完那个,他并没有成功地妥协的一件东西。那就是死亡。合唱队说,他曾构想出一个绝对神奇的机智的设计,也就是,实质上翻译成为「逃避到不可能的疾病里。」

There is no way of ascribing another meaning to that phrase than the one I ascribe. The translations usually attempt to say that man even manages to come to deal with sickness, but that's not what it means at all. He hasn't managed to come to terms with death but he invents marvelous gimmicks in the form of sicknesses he himself fabricates. There is something extraordinary about finding that notion expressed in 441 B.C. as one of mankind's essential dimensions. It wouldn't make any sense to translate that as "an escape from sicknesses." Sickness is involved here μηχανόεν. That's quite a gimmick he has invented; make of it what you will.


In any case, the text repeats that man has failed relative to Hades, and we enter immediately afterwards into μηχανό^ν. There is something related to σοφόν in that, a term that isn't so simple. I would just remind you of the analysis of the Heraclitean sense of σοφόν, "wise," and όμολο-γβϊν, "to say the same thing," that is to be found in the Heidegger text I translated for the first issue of La Psychanalyse. That σοφόν still has all of its primitive vigor.

无论如何,这个文本重复,相对应这个阴府,人曾经失败。随后我们立即进入μηχανό^ν 。有某件东西跟σοφόν息息相关。因为,一个术语并没有那么单纯。我仅是提醒你们,赫拉克利恩对σοφό「 智慧」与όμολο-γβϊν,「说同样的事情」的分析,应该在海德格的文本里能够被找到,我曾翻译这个文本,在La Psychanalyse.。那个 σοφόν 依旧拥有所有它的原始的活力。

There is something of sopkos in the mechanism, μηχανόβν. There is something imep έλπίδ'Ζχων, which transcends all hope and which ipirei. It's this that directs him sometimes toward evil and sometimes toward the good. That is to say that this power or mandate, as I translated the word sopkos in the article I was talking about, which is laid upon him by this good, is an eminently ambiguous one.

在这个机械结构μηχανόβν. 存在着某件 sopkos ,某件imep έλπίδ'Ζχων。它超越所有的希望,它ipirei.。就是这个有时引导他朝向邪恶,有时朝向善。换句话说,在我谈论的那篇文章。mandate的这个力量,如同我翻译这个字词sopkos,受到善行的安排,意思很明显是暧昧的。

Right afterwards we find the passage beginning νόμους παρβίρων, etc., upon which the whole of the play is going to turn. For irapeipoiv means undeniably "to arrange the laws wrongly, to weave them together wrongly, to get them all mixed up." Χθονός is "the earth," and Beat» τ'ένορκον δίκαν is "that which is formulated or told in the law." That's the thing we appeal to in the silence of the analysand. We don't say "Speak." We don't say "Enunciate" or "Recount," but "Tell." But that's exactly what we shouldn't do. That Δίκη is essential and constitutes the dimension of enunciation or evopKov, confirmed by an oath of the gods.

后来,我们发现这个段落开始νόμους παρβίρων,等等。整个的戏剧就是绕着它打转。因为irapeipoiv无可否认地「错误地安排法则,错误地将它们编织在一块,将它们都混淆一块。」irapeipoiv 就是大地;Beat» τ'ένορκον δίκαν 就是「在法则里被说明或被告诉的东西」。那就是我们诉诸于的东西,在分析者的沉默当中。」我们并没有「言说吧」。我们并没有是「请表达」或「请叙述」,而是说「请告诉」。那确实是我们不应该说做到。那个Δίκη是重要的,并且构成表达的维度,或是众神的誓言证实的evopKov。

There are two obvious dimensions that may be distinguished without difficulty: on the one hand, the laws of the earth and, on the other, the commandments of the gods. But they may be confused. They don't belong to the same order, and if one mixes them up, there will be trouble. There will be so much trouble that the Chorus, which in spite of its vacillations does cleave to a fixed line, affirms, "In any case, we don't want to be associated with so and so." The point is to proceed in that direction is properly speaking τό μη καλόν or something that isn't "beautiful," and not, as it is translated, because of the very audacity of the idea, something that isn't "good." Thus the Chorus doesn't want the character in question as its πάρεδρος, that is as its companion or immediate neighbor. The Chorus doesn't want to be with him in the same central point we are talking about. It doesn't want to have close relations with him, nor does it want to ίσον φρονών, to have the same desire. It separates its own desire from the desire of the other. And I don't think I am forcing the issue when I find here an echo of certain formulas that I have given you.

有两个明显的维度可能轻易地被区别:一方面,大地的法则,另一方面,众神的命令。但是它们可能会被混淆。它们并不属于相同的秩序。假如我们混淆它们,将会有麻烦。将会有那么多的麻烦。合唱队尽管它的摇摆态度,并没有裂开到一条固定的线,肯定地说:「无论如何,我们并不想要跟某某有所关联。」重点是要继续朝那个方向前进,适当来说,那个方向并不是某件「美丽的」东西。如同它被翻译的,这并不是因为这个观念的大胆,某将并不是「善行」的东西。因此,合唱队并不想要受到质疑的这个特性,作为它的πάρεδρος 。也就是,作为它的同伴,或是它的近邻。合唱队并不想要跟它在一块在相同的中央的点,我们正在谈论的点。它并不想要跟他有密切的关系。它也并不想要有相同的欲望。它分开它自己的欲望,跟他者的欲望。我并不认为,我正在强迫这个问题,当我在此发现我曾经给予你们的公式,有某些的迴响。

Does Creon confuse νόμους χθονός with the Δίκη of the gods? The classical interpretation is clear: Creon represents the laws of the city and identifies them with the decrees of the gods. But it's not as obvious as that, for it cannot be denied that Antigone is after all concerned with the chthonic laws, the laws of the earth. I haven't stopped emphasizing the fact that it is for the sake of her brother who has descended into the subterranean world that she opposes κήρνγμα, that she resists Creon's order; it is in the name of the most radically chthonian of relations that are blood relations. In brief, she is in a position to place the Δίκη of the gods on her side. In any case the ambiguity is obvious. And this is something that we will shortly see confirmed.

克瑞恩混淆νόμους χθονός 跟众神的the Δίκη吗?古典的解释是清楚的:克瑞恩代表城邦的法则,并且将它们认同时众神的命令。但是并没有那样明显。因为无法否认的,安提贡尼毕竟就是关心到心灵净化的法则,大地的法则。我并没有停止强调这个事实; 为了她的兄长已经沉沦到地下世界的缘故,她反对κήρνγμα,她抗拒克瑞恩的秩序。就是以这个名义,具有血缘关系的最强烈的心灵净化,总之,她处于这个立场,将众神的这个Δίκη,放置她的旁边。无论如何,这个暧昧是明显的。这就是某件我们不久将看见被证实的东西。

I have already pointed out how, after the condemnation of Antigone, the Chorus emphasizes the fact that she went in search of her Ate. In a similar vein, Electra says, "Why do you always plunge yourself into the Ati of your house, why do you persist in referring to the fatal murder in front of Aegisthus and your mother? Aren't you the one who brings down all kinds of evil on your head as a result?" To which the other responds, "I agree but I can't help it."


It is because she goes toward Até here, because it is even a question of going έκτος άτα?, of going beyond the limit of Até, that Antigone interests the Chorus. It says that she's the one who violates the limits of Ati through her desire. The lines I referred to above concern this and especially those that end with the formula έκτος άτας, to go beyond the limit of Ate. Ate is not αμαρτία, that is to say a mistake or error; it's got nothing to do with doing something stupid.

那是因为她朝向这里的悲惨命运Ate前进。因为问题甚至是要去έκτος άτα,去到超越悲惨命运Ate的限制,安提贡尼让合唱队感到興趣。合唱队说,她凭借她的欲望,违背悲惨命运的限制。我以上提到的这几行,跟这个有关。特别是跟έκτος άτας 这个公式结尾的那几行,超越悲惨命运Ate;那并不是αμαρτία,也就是错误或是失误。它跟做某件愚蠢的事情有关系。

When at the end Creon returns bearing something in his arms, lines 1259-1260, and, as the Chorus tells us, it seems to be nothing other than the body of his son who has committed suicide, the Chorus then says, "If we may say so, it is not a misfortune that is external to him; it is αυτός άμαρτών, his own mistake. He's the one who made the mistake of getting himself into the mess." 'Αμαρτία is the word used, that is "mistake" or "blunder."

最后,克瑞恩回来,手臂抱著某件东西。在1259-1260行,当合唱队告诉我们,这实实在在就是他的自杀的儿子的尸体。合唱队因此说:「假如我们可以这样说,这并不是外在于他的命运。那是他自己的αυτός άμαρτών,他自己的错误。他是犯下让自己混乱的错误的这个人。」'Αμαρτία 就是被使用的这个字词,意思是错误或是失误。

That's the meaning Aristotle insists on, and to my mind he's wrong, for that is not the quality which leads the tragic hero to his death. It's only true for Creon the counter- or secondary hero, who is indeed άμαρτών. At the moment when Eurydice commits suicide, the messenger uses the word άμαρτάνβιν. He hopes, we are told, that she isn't going to do something stupid. And naturally he and the Coryphaeus stiffen in anticipation because no noise is heard. The Coryphaeus says, "That's a bad sign." The mortal fruit that Creon harvests through his obstinacy and his insane orders is the dead son he carries in his arms. He has been άμαρτών, he has made a mistake. It's not a question here of αλλότρια άτη. Ati concerns the Other, the field of the Other, and it doesn't belong to Creon. It is, on the other hand, the place where Antigone is situated.

那就是亚里斯多德坚持的这个意义。依我之见,他是错误,因为那并不是导致悲剧英雄死亡的特质。仅有针对克瑞恩,这位反英雄,或次要的英雄,才是真实的。他确实就是错误άμαρτών。在尤瑞迪斯自杀的那个时刻,信差使用这个字词「错误άμαρτάνβιν」。我们被告诉,他希望,她将不会做某件愚蠢的事情。当然,信差和科瑞费斯都惊吓呆了,因为没有噪音被听见。科瑞费斯说「那是不祥之兆」。克瑞恩由于他的固执与其疯狂的命令,收获导致死亡的结果,那就是他抱在手臂里的儿子。他曾经是错误άμαρτών,他曾经犯错误。在此的问题并不是αλλότρια άτη。悲惨命运Ate 跟大他者,大他者的领域息息相关,那个领域并不属于克瑞恩。在另一方面,那是安提贡尼被定位的地方。

«《悲剧的本质:索福克勒斯的安提戈涅之评论》一 安提贡尼的辉煌 拉康 | Jacques Lacan
《拉康 | Jacques Lacan》

    [catid] => 41
    [upid] => 439
    [name] => 拉康 | Jacques Lacan
    [note] => 雅克·拉康/雅各·拉冈 l Jacques-Marie-émile Lacan(1901.04.13-1981.09.09)

法国精神分析学大师,拉冈在精神分析学的理论上,对弗洛依德的理论进行了重要的解读,应用欧陆哲学(结构主义、黑格尔哲学、海德格哲学)为基础,为精神分析的理论,提供了一次哲学性的重塑,亦从基础理论上解开了对弗洛依德的一些误解。 [type] => news [ischannel] => 0 [displayorder] => 252 [tpl] => [viewtpl] => [thumb] => 1_2009100310294219szP.thumb.jpg [image] => 1_2009100310294219szP.jpg [haveattach] => 0 [bbsmodel] => 1 [bbsurltype] => [blockmodel] => 1 [blockparameter] => fid/83/order/lastpost DESC/limit/0,10/bbsurltype/site/cachename/1278727425/tpl/data [blocktext] => a:26:{s:8:"formhash";s:8:"a1bdc947";s:8:"bbsmodel";s:1:"1";s:10:"blockmodel";s:1:"1";s:3:"tid";s:0:"";s:3:"fid";a:1:{i:0;s:2:"83";}s:8:"dateline";s:1:"0";s:8:"lastpost";s:1:"0";s:8:"authorid";s:0:"";s:8:"readperm";a:2:{i:0;s:0:"";i:1;s:0:"";}s:5:"price";a:2:{i:0;s:0:"";i:1;s:0:"";}s:5:"views";a:2:{i:0;s:0:"";i:1;s:0:"";}s:7:"replies";a:2:{i:0;s:0:"";i:1;s:0:"";}s:4:"rate";a:2:{i:0;s:0:"";i:1;s:0:"";}s:5:"order";a:3:{i:0;s:8:"lastpost";i:1;s:0:"";i:2;s:0:"";}s:2:"sc";a:3:{i:0;s:4:"DESC";i:1;s:0:"";i:2;s:0:"";}s:3:"sql";s:0:"";s:10:"subjectlen";s:0:"";s:10:"bbsurltype";s:4:"site";s:14:"thevaluesubmit";s:8:"提交保存";s:9:"bbssubmit";s:3:"yes";s:5:"catid";s:2:"41";s:4:"type";s:4:"news";s:5:"start";s:1:"0";s:5:"limit";s:2:"10";s:9:"cachename";s:10:"1278727425";s:7:"tplname";s:4:"data";} [url] => [subcatid] => 41 [htmlpath] => [domain] => [perpage] => 20 [prehtml] => [homeid] => 0 [upname] => 拉康学派 )