PSYCHOTIC TRANSFERENCE 精神病移情
Whilst according a central diagnostic significance to the language disturbances in psychosis, Lacan was eager to emphasize that psychosis is not ‘a pure and simple fact of language’ (Lacan 1993[1955–56]:61). The foreclosure of the Name-of-the-Father does not only affect the individual’s speech, but also influences his sexual identity and relationships with others.
虽然拉康给予精神病的语言困扰,一个中心的诊断意义,他很渴望强调,精神病并不是“纯粹而简的语言的事实”。以父之名的除权弃绝并不仅影响个人的言词,而且影响他的性的认同与跟别人的关系。
Lacan was of the view that the function of the father—the cornerstone of the symbolic order—overwrites a human being’s natural status of ‘sexuation’, and introduces her into a set of norms dictating what it is to be masculine or feminine and defining what men and women should do if they want to be perceived as belonging to a particular gender (Lacan 1995a[1964]:276).
拉康的观点是,父亲的功能—作为象征秩序的基石—复写一个人的性化的自然地位。并且介绍她进入一套命名。这套命名指示成为男性或成为女性是什么样子,并且定义男人与女人应该做什么,假如他们想要被感知,作为是属于特殊的性别。
The principle of this symbolic sexual order is the symbolic phallus (F), which represents the mark of difference between the signifiers, including those of masculinity and femininity. When the paternal function is foreclosed the phallus does not establish itself within the symbolic order, which induces a peculiar ‘blending’ of the signifiers (dubbed ‘holophrase’ by Lacan) and which also blurs the culturally installed differences between masculinity and femininity.17 In psychosis the symbolic pegs of sexual identity do not hold, through which masculinity and femininity start to melt into one another.
象征的性的秩序的原则就是象征的阳具。象征的阳具代表这些能指之间的差异的标记,包括男性与女性的那些差异。当父亲的功能被除权弃绝,阳具并没有建立它自己,在象征的秩序里。这导致这些能指的特殊的“混合”(被拉康命名为“单词语”)。它也模糊了被文化安置的差异,男性与女性之间的差异)。在精神病,性的认同的象征的塞子挡住,因为这样,男性与女性开始互相融合一块。
Schreber was for instance convinced that his body was being emasculated in view of his final transformation into a woman who, after having been inseminated by the divine agencies, would beget a new human race.18 In a sense, Schreber’ s conviction does not exemplify the psychotic collapse of sexual differences as such, because it is already part and parcel of his attempt to introduce a certain order, albeit a delusional one, into his chaotic experiences.19 However, it does indicate to what extent he did not assume a shared sociocultural system of distinct sexual identities, succumbing to a sexual matrix in which the boundaries between the categories have become very hazy.
譬如,许瑞伯相信,他的身体正在变得柔弱,因为他最后转化成为女人。经过神性的代理者的授精之后,这位女人将会生下一个新的人类的品质。许瑞伯的相信并没有替性的差异本身的精神病的崩塌,作为典范。因为它已经是他的企图的部分与包裹,企图要介绍某个秩序,虽然是幻觉的秩序,介绍进入他的混乱的经验里。可是,它确实指示他并没有担负起共享的社会与文化的系统,对于不同的性的认同。它屈从于性的基座。在这个基座里,范畴之间的边界已经变得模糊。
With regard to the psychotic’s relationships with others, Lacan drew attention to the fact that the exclusion of the Other ushers the individual into strange entanglements with others, which are continuously pervaded by rivalry and competition. The divine agencies invade Schreber’s body and mind as much as he invades their own substance, which indicates that his relationship with his tormentors is marked by continuous rivalry.
关于精神病跟别人的关系,拉康注意到这个事实:大他者的排斥引导个人进入跟别人的奇异的纠缠。这些纠缠继续受到敌意与競争的瀰漫。神性的代理者侵入许瑞伯的身体与心灵。如同他侵人他们自己的物质。这指示著,他跟他的折磨者的关系,被继续的敌意标记。
Although Schreber has to comply with the divine bye-laws, the gods bear witness to an incredible stupidity, through which their existence depends as much on him as his existence depends on them. Schreber has a mirror relationship with his world and his own bodily disintegration is reflected in the fragmentation of the divine bodies (Lacan 1993[1955– 56]:97–101). It is as if Schreber’s persecutors were but the virtual images of himself; figures that would not have existed without him, but whose presence he was unable to plumb and control.
虽然许瑞伯必须同意神性的章程,众神见证一个匪夷所思的愚蠢。由于这种愚蠢,他们的存在同样依靠他,如同他的存在依靠他们。许瑞伯跟他的世界拥有一个镜像的关系。他自己的身体的瓦解被反映在神性的身体的碎片化。好像许瑞伯的迫害者仅是他自己的虚拟的意象,假如没有他,本来不会存在的人物,但是他们的存在,他不能够探索与控制。
This strictly imaginary relationship with others seriously affects the psychotic’s position within the transference, which Freud (1916– 17a [1915–17]:431–447) defined as the patient’s emotional tie (Gefuhlsbindung) with the analyst. Unlike Freud, Lacan did not rule out the psychotic’s ability to develop a transference relationship with the analyst, yet he distinguished this ‘psychotic transference’ from the neurotic type, whereby he followed two separate directions.
跟别人的严格的想像的关系,严重地影响精神病的立场,在移情之内。弗洛伊德定义移情,作为是跟精神分析家的情感的关系。不像弗洛伊德,拉康并没有排除精神病者的能力,跟他的精神分析家发展移情的关系。可是,他区别这个‘精神病的移情“,跟神经症的移情的不同。从这里,他遵循两个不同的方向。
The first one was put into effect during the early 1950s, in the context of his construction of the ‘L-schema’ as a dynamic model of the analytic process.20 During this period Lacan distinguished between a symbolic and an imaginary form of transference, the former being the efficacious, beneficial type and the latter merely functioning as an obstacle (Lacan 1988b[1953–54]:109).