You are on page 1of 3

雄伯手記 990421

Zizek:
Here, however, we must carefully distinguish between this Lacanian
notion of the divided subject and the “post-structuralist” notion of
the subject-positions. In “post-structuralism,” the subject is usually
reduced to subjection. He is conceived as an effect of a
fundamentally non-subjective process: the subject is always caught
in, traversed by, the pre-subjective process (of “writing,” of “desire,”
etc.), and the accent is put on die different modes of how individuals
“experience,” “live,” their positions as “subjects,” “actors,” “agents”
of the historical process. For example, it is only at a certain point in
European history that the author of works of art, a painter or a
writer, began to see himself as a creative individual who, in his
work, is giving expression to his interior subjective richness. The
great master of such analysis was, of course, Foucault: one might
say that the main point of his late work was to articulate the
different modes of how individuals assume their subject-positions.
    
紀傑克:
然而,在这里我们必须谨 慎地区分被分割的主体(the divided subject)这
个拉康的观念与主体位置(subject-position)的“后结构主义”观念。在“后结
构主义”中,主体通常被缩减为臣服 (subjection)。他被设想成一个基本的非
主体作用(non-subjective process)的结果:主体总是被捕获于(关于“书
写”、“欲望”等等的)前主体作用(pre-subjective process)并由它所穿过,
重音放在了个体是如何“体验”、“经历”其作为历史过程的“主体”、“行动者”、“媒
介”的位置的不同模式上。例如,只有 在欧洲历史的某一时期,艺术作品的作者,
画家或作家才开始将他自己看作是在其著作中表达出其内部主观丰富性的一个
创造性个体。当然,这种分析的大师就是福 柯(Foucault):人们可以说他晚
期著作的重点就是要链接个体如何假定其主体位置的不同模式。

雄伯:
以上是中國大陸「實踐與文本」網站的一篇譯文。紀傑克詮釋拉岡對於人作為「分
裂的主體」的觀念,並引述後結構主義的「主體的立場」的觀念,作為對照。

「主體的立場」被定義為「主体通常被淪落成为臣服 (subjection)。」臣服一詞,
語義不甚明朗,我在其它版本看到的英譯是主體化 (subjectivation )」。

1
He is conceived as an effect of a fundamentally non-subjective
process: the subject is always caught in, traversed by, the pre-
subjective process (of “writing,” of “desire,” etc.), and the accent is
put on die different modes of how individuals “experience,” “live,”
their positions as “subjects,” “actors,” “agents” of the historical
process.

人的主體化,被構想成為一個基本上是非主體性的過程的結果:在諸如寫作或
欲望的前主體性的過程,主體當局者迷,無法超越宏觀。此時,主體念茲在茲的
是,作為歷史過程的參與者、旁觀者、或仲介者,他是如何以自身的立場,來親
歷其境。

雄伯:
「非主體性的過程」non-subjective process 語義很抽象,何不乾脆說「客體性
的過程」?具體一點,我推想指的是時代的變遷、社會的轉型、家庭的變故等等。
「寫作或欲望的前主體性過程」pre-subjective process of writing or
desire,我推想指的是:家庭、社會、習俗、國家、種族、或文化,都是在主體出生
之前,就已經先存在。在成長的過程,主體的言說、寫作、及欲望的表達,身不由
己,無法不受它們權力的影響或制約。

For example, it is only at a certain point in European history that the


author of works of art, a painter or a writer, began to see himself as
a creative individual who, in his work, is giving expression to his
interior subjective richness.

例如,在歐洲歷史上,只有到達某個時代,藝術作品的作者,無論是畫家或作
家,才開始將自己看待是一個創作的個人。他可以在自己的作品中,表達他內在
的主體的豐富內涵。

雄伯:
言下之意,在那個時代之前,身為創作者的畫家或作家,需要把自己當著是一
個工具或媒體,服膺於家庭、種族、社會、國家、文化、或政治意識形態,表達它們
所要求他表達的內容,而不是自己內心有所感動的昂揚充沛的生命力。

The great master of such analysis was, of course, Foucault: one


might say that the main point of his late work was to articulate the
different modes of how individuals assume their subject-positions.

2
對於體制的權力對於主體化的滲透、制約與控制,予以分析、解構、甚至顛覆,最
不遺餘力的人,當然非福柯莫屬。我們可以說,他晚期著作的重點,就是要清楚
表達,個人如何扮演主體的立場,如何以各種不同自力救濟的方式,突破體制
權力的層層控制。

雄伯:
英文的“ assume”,在此不是「假定」 ,而是「扮演」。如 He assumes an
important role.= He plays an important role. =He takes on an
important role. (他扮演一個重要的角色)。除外,“articulate”,作「連接」
解釋,從上下文來看頗為怪異,我想作「清楚表達」解釋,較為順暢。

對於此段,我覺得直譯實在無法讓人明白,所以我擅自添加一些說明的修飾語。
這樣做雖然不大合乎翻譯的規範,但至少比較能讓別人看得懂。

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
springherohsiung@gmail.com