‌‌‌‌　　英：fantasy;法：fantasme

‌‌‌‌　　幻想的概念 (在《标准版》中被拼写为“phantasy”)是弗洛伊德著作的核心。实际上，精神分析的起源便与弗洛伊德在1897年承认的“诱惑的记忆有时是幻想的产物，而非真实性虐待的痕迹”有着密切的关联。弗洛伊德思想发展中的这一关键时刻 (通常都会被过分简单化地冠以“诱惑理论的放弃”之名)似乎便意味着幻想是与现实相对立的，是阻碍正确现实知觉的一种纯粹虚幻的想象力的产物。然而，这样一种有关幻想的见解却无法在精神分析理论之中得以维系，因为现实并未被看作某种没有问题的给定，其中存在着一种单一客观的正确知觉方式，而是被看作其本身是被话语性建构出来的某种事物。因此，弗洛伊德在1897年的此种思想转变便并非意味着对于一切性虐待记忆的真实性的拒绝，而是意味着对于记忆的基本话语性与想象性本质的发现：有关过去事件的那些记忆会依照无意识的欲望而不断地加以改造，以至于症状并不起源于任何假设的“客观事实”，而是起源于幻想在其中扮演关键角色的一种复杂辩证。于是，弗洛伊德便用“幻想”这个术语来表示一种在想象中呈现且上演了某种无意识欲望的场景。主体总是在这一场景中扮演着某种角色，即便这在当时并非是直接显而易见的。这种幻想化的场景既可能是有意识的，也可能是无意识的。当它是无意识的时候，分析家就必须基于其他的线索来对其进行重构 (见：Freud, 1919e).

‌‌‌‌　　虽然拉康接受了弗洛伊德有关幻想的重要性及其视觉性质是上演欲望的剧本的阐述，但是他还强调了幻想的保护性功能。拉康将幻想的场景 (SCENE)比喻为电影屏幕上凝固的影像：正如影片可能会在某一时刻上停止，以避免表现紧随其后的一幕创伤性场景，幻想的屏幕也是这样一种遮蔽阉割的防御 (S4,11920)。幻想因而是以固定且静止的性质为特征的。

‌‌‌‌　　虽然“幻想”作为一个重要的术语只是从1957年开始才出现在拉康的著作之中，但是一种相对稳定的防御 (DEFENCE)模式的概念早已显现了出来 (见：例如，拉康在1951年关于“主体借以建构其对象的那些永恒方式”的评论：Ec, 225)。这一概念既是拉康有关幻想的思想，也是他有关临床结构的概念的根源之所在：两者皆被构想为防御自身以抵制阉割，即抵制大他者中的缺失的一种相对稳定的方式。因而，每一种临床结构都可以通过用幻想场景来遮蔽大他者中的缺失的特殊方式而加以区分。拉康以数元 (8◇)来加以形式化的神经症的幻想，在欲望图解中便是作为主体对于大他者的谜一般的欲望的回应，即以对大他者想要从我身上得到什么 (Che vuoi?, 即“你要什么？”)这一问题做出回答的方式而出现的 (见：E, 313)。这个数元应当读作：被画杠的主体相对于对象的关系。性倒错的幻想则颠覆了此种与对象的关系，并因而被形式化为a◇S (Ec, 774).

‌‌‌‌　　尽管数元 (S◇)标定了神经症幻想的普遍结构，然而拉康对于癔症患者与强迫型神经症患者的幻想也提供了一些更加具体的公式 (S8,295)。虽然不同的幻想公式指示了那些享有相同临床结构的人的幻想的共同特征，但是分析家也必须要留意那些刻画了每位病人的特殊幻想剧本的独有特征。这些独有特征表达着主体的特殊享乐 (JOUISSANCE)模式，尽管是以一种经过扭曲的方式。这种明显存在于幻想之中的扭曲，正好将幻想标记为一种妥协形成 (compromise formation); 幻想因而既是使主体能够维持其欲望的东西 (S11,185: Ec, 780), 又是“主体在其消失的欲望的水平上维持其自身的东西”(E, 272, 强调为作者所加)。

‌‌‌‌　　拉康认为，除了所有出现在梦中与其他地方的无数形象之外，还总是存在着一个无意识的“基本幻想”(见：S8,127)。在精神分析治疗的过程当中，分析家以其全部细节来重构分析者的幻想。然而，治疗并不会停止在那里：分析者还必须继续去“穿越基本幻想”(见：S11,273)。换句话说，治疗必须对主体的基本防御模式产生某种修改，即在其享乐模式上产生某种改变

‌‌‌‌　　虽然拉康承认形象在幻想中的力量，但是他也坚持强调说这并非是由于形象本身的任何固有品质，而是由于它在象征结构中所占据的位置：幻想始终是“在某种能指结构中开始运作的一个形象”(E, 272)。拉康批评克莱因派在对幻想进行说明的时候并未充分考虑到这一象征的结构，并因而仍然处在想象界的层面上：“任何旨在将其【幻想】化约为想象的企图…都是一种永久的误解”(E, 272)。在1960年代，拉康将其一整年的研讨班专门用于讨论他所谓的“幻想的逻辑”(the logic of fantasy)(Lacan, 1966-7),并再度强调了能指结构在幻想中的重要性。

‌‌‌‌　　(fantasme) The concept of fantasy (spelt 'phantasy'in the Standard Edition) is central toFreud's work. Indeed, the origin of psychoanalysis is bound up with Freud's recognitionin 1897 that memories of seduction are sometimes the product of fantasy rather thantraces of real sexual abuse. This crucial moment in the development of Freud's thought (which is often simplistically dubbed the abandonment of the seduction theory') seemsto imply that fantasy is opposed to reality, a purely illusory product of the imaginationwhich stands in the way of a correct perception of reality. However, such a view offantasy cannot be maintained in psychoanalytic theory, since reality is not seen as anunproblematic given in which there is a single objectively correct way of perceiving, butas something which is itself discursively constructed. Therefore the change in Freud'sideas in 1897 does not imply a rejection of the veracity of all memories of sexual abuse, but the discovery of the fundamentally discursive and imaginative nature of memory; memories of past events are continually being reshaped in accordance with unconsciousdesires, so much so that symptoms originate not in any supposed 'objective facts'but in a complex dialectic in which fantasy plays a vital role. Freud uses the term 'fantasy', then, to denote a scene which is presented to the imagination and which stages an unconsciousdesire. The subject invariably plays a part in this scene, even when this is notimmediately apparent. The fantasised scene may be conscious or unconscious. Whenunconscious, the analyst must reconstruct it on the basis of other clues (see Freud, 1919e).

‌‌‌‌　　While Lacan accepts Freud's formulations on the importance of fantasy and on itsvisual quality as a scenario which stages desire, he emphasises the protective function offantasy. Lacan compares the fantasy SCENE to a frozen image on a cinema screen; justas the film may be stopped at a certain point in order to avoid showing a traumatic scenewhich follows, so also the fantasy scene is a defence which veils castration (S4,119-20). The fantasy is thus characterised by a fixed and immobile quality.

‌‌‌‌　　Although 'fantasy'only emerges as a significant term in Lacan's work from 1957 on, the concept of a relatively stable mode of DEFENCE is evident earlier on (see, forexample, Lacan's remark in 1951 on 'the permanent modes by which the subjectconstitutes his objects'; Ec, 225). This concept is at the root both of Lacan's idea offantasy and of his notion of clinical structure; both are conceived of as a relatively stableway of defending oneself against castration, against the lack in the Other. Each clinicalstructure may thus be distinguished by the particular way in which it uses a fantasy sceneto veil the lack in the Other. The neurotic fantasy, which Lacan formalises in thematheme (a) appears in the graph of desire as the subjeet's response to theenigmatic desire of the Other, a way of answering the question about what the Otherwants from me (Che vuoi?)(see E, 313). The matheme is to be read: the barred subject inrelation to the object. The perverse fantasy inverts this relation to the object, and is thusformalised as a (Ec, 774).

‌‌‌‌　　Although the matheme (adesignates the general structure of the neuroticfantasy, Lacan also provides more specific formulas for the fantasy of the hysteric andthat of the obsessional neurotic (S8,295). While the various formulas of fantasy indicatethe common features of the fantasies of those who share the same clinical structure, theanalyst must also attend to the unique features which characterise each patient'sparticular fantasmatic scenario. These unique features express the subject's particularmode of JOUISSANCE, though in a distorted way. The distortion evident in the fantasymarks it as a compromise formation; the fantasy is thus both that which enables thesubject to sustain his desire (S11,185; Ec, 780), and 'that by which the subject sustainshimselfat the level of his vanishing desire' (E, 272, emphasis added).

‌‌‌‌　　Lacan holds that beyond all the myriad images which appear in dreams and elsewherethere is always one 'fundamental fantasy'which is unconscious (see S8,127). In thecourse of psychoanalytic treatment, the analyst reconstructs the analysand's fantasy in allits details. However, the treatment does not stop there; the analysand must go on to'traverse the fundamental fantasy' (see S11,273). In other words, the treatment mustproduce some modification of the subject's fundamental mode of defence, somealteration in his mode of jouissance.

‌‌‌‌　　Although Lacan recognises the power of the image in fantasy, he insists that this isdue not to any intrinsic quality of the image in itself but to the place which it occupies ina symbolic structure; the fantasy is always 'an image set to work in a signifying structure' (E, 272). Lacan criticises the Kleinian account of fantasy for not taking this symbolic structure fully into account,and thus remaining at the level of the imaginary;'anyattempt to reduce [fantasy]to the imagination...is a permanent misconception'(E,272).In the 1960s,Lacan devotes a whole year of his seminar to discussing what he calls 'thelogic of fantasy'(Lacan,1966-7),again stressing the importance of the signifyingstructure in fantasy.