‌‌‌‌　　英：mirror stage; 法：stade du miroir

‌‌‌‌　　镜子阶段 (在英文中也被译作“照镜时期”[looking-glassphase])是拉康对于精神分析理论正式贡献的第一个主题，他在1936年向举办于马里安巴 (Marienbad)的第十四届国际精神分析大会提交了这一概念 (虽然1936年的原始文稿从未得到出版，但在1949年出现了一则重写的版本)。从此时起，镜子阶段便构成了贯穿在拉康全部著作中的一个持续的参照点。尽管镜子阶段的概念看似相当简单，然而随着拉康在各种不同的语境下对它的重申与修改，这一概念也在拉康的著述过程中呈现出了一种不断增加的复杂性。

‌‌‌‌　　法国心理学家亨利·瓦隆①早在1931年便首先描述了“镜子试验”(mirror test), 此人也是拉康的朋友，尽管拉康将这一试验的发现归于鲍德温2 (E, 1)。它指的是可以把人类婴儿同与其亲缘关系最接近的动物黑猩猩区分开来的一项特殊的实验。半岁大的儿童与同龄的黑猩猩的不同，即在于前者会变得痴迷于其镜中的映像，并且欢欣雀跃地把它接纳为其自身的形象，而黑猩猩则会迅速认识到那一形象是虚幻的，并且丧失对它的兴趣。

‌‌‌‌　　拉康的镜子阶段概念 (与瓦隆的“镜子试验”相反)远远不止是一项纯粹的实验：镜子阶段代表着主体性结构的一个根本性面向。在1936一1949年，拉康似乎把镜子阶段看作可以在儿童的发展中被定位于一个特定时间上的有始（六个月大）有终（十八个月大）的阶段 (见：E, 5), 然而在此一时期的末了，已然存在着一些迹象表明他正在拓宽这一概念。到了1950年代初期，拉康便不再把他仅仅视为幼儿生活中的某一时刻，而是将其看作同样代表着一种主体性的永久结构，即想象界 (MAGINARY)秩序的范式；镜子阶段是一个“竞技场”(stade), 主体在其中被其自身的形象永久地捕获并迷惑。

【镜子阶段是】我为其赋予了双重价值的一种现象。首先，因为它标志着儿童心智发展上的一个决定性的转折点，所以具有历史性价值。其次，它代表着与身体形象之间的一种本质性的力比多关系。

(Lacan, 1951b:14)

‌‌‌‌　　随着拉康进一步发展镜子阶段的概念，他的强调便较少落在其“历史性价值”之上，而是更多落在其“结构性价值”之上。因而，到1956年，拉康便能说：“镜子阶段远非是出现在儿童发展中的一种纯粹的现象。它阐明了二元关系的冲突性本质。”(S4,17)

‌‌‌‌　　镜子阶段描述了自我 (EGO)经由认同过程的形成，自我即某人认同于其自身镜像 (SPECULAR IMAGE)的结果。此种现象的关键，便在于人类婴儿的早熟：在六个月大时，婴儿仍旧缺乏运动协调性。然而，其视觉系统的发展相对超前，而这就意味着在对自己的身体运动获得控制之前，婴儿便能够在镜子中认出自己。婴儿会将其自身的形象看作一个完型 (见：格式塔[GESTALT]), 而此一形象的综合便与身体的不协调产生了一种反差的感觉，后者被体验为一个碎裂的身体 (FRAGMENTED BODY); 这种反差首先会被婴儿感受为与其自身形象的竞争，因为形象的整体性以碎裂威胁着主体，镜子阶段便在主体与形象之间引起了一种侵凌性的张力 (见：侵凌性[AGGRESSIVITY])。为了解除这一侵凌性的张力，主体便认同那一形象，对于相似者的这一原初认同，便构成了自我。主体将其形象接纳为其自身的这一认同的时刻，被拉康描述为一种狂喜 (jubilation)的时刻 (E, 1), 因为它导致了一种想象性的掌控感：“【孩子的】欢喜是由于它在预期自己尚未实际获得的一定程度的肌肉协调性方面取得了想象性的胜利”(Lacan, 1951b: 15; 见：S1,79)。然而，当孩子将其自身不稳定的掌控感比较于母亲的全能之时，此种狂喜也可能会伴随着某种抑郁性的反应 (Ec, 345; S4,186)。这一认同也涉及理想自我 (ideal ego), 其作用是充当对于未来整体性的某种许诺而把自我维系在预期之中。

‌‌‌‌　　镜子阶段表明了自我乃是误认 (meconnaissance)的产物，也是主体变得异化于其自身的场所。它代表着主体在想象秩序中的引入。然而，镜子阶段同样具有一个重要的象征性维度。象征秩序即体现在怀抱或扶持婴儿的成人的角色之中。当主体欢欣雀跃地将其形象接纳为其自身之后，他便会在下一刻把头转向代表着大他者的这个成人，仿佛要召唤大他者来认可这一形象似的 (Lacan, 1962-3:1962年11月28日的研讨班)。

‌‌‌‌　　正如纳喀索斯 (Narcissus)的故事 (在古希腊神话中，纳喀索斯爱上了他自己的倒影)所清楚表明的那样，镜子阶段同样与自恋有着紧密的关联。

‌‌‌‌　　(stade du miroir) The mirror stage (also translated in English as 'the looking-glassphase') was the subject of Lacan's first official contribution to psychoanalytic theory, when he propounded the concept to the Fourteenth International Psychoanalytical Congress at Marienbad in 1936 (the original 1936 paper was never published, but arewritten version appeared in 1949). From this point on, the mirror stage forms a constantpoint of reference throughout Lacan's entire work. While apparently quite simple, theconcept of the mirror stage takes on an ever-increasing complexity during the course of Lacan's work, as he takes it up and reworks it in various different contexts.

‌‌‌‌　　The 'mirror test'was first described by the French psychologist and friend of Lacan, Henri Wallon, in 1931, although Lacan attributes its discovery to Baldwin (E, 1). It refersto a particular experiment which can differentiate the human infant from his closest animal relative, the chimpanzee. The six-month-old child differs from the chimpanzee ofthe same age in that the former becomes fascinated with its reflection in the mirror andjubilantly assumes it as its own image, whereas the chimpanzee quickly realises that theimage is illusory and loses interest in it.

‌‌‌‌　　Lacan's concept of the mirror stage (as opposed to Wallon's 'mirror test') is far morethan a mere experiment: the mirror stage represents a fundamental aspect of the structureof subjectivity. Whereas in 1936-49, Lacan seems to see it is a stage which can belocated at a specific time in the development of the child with a beginning (six months) and an end (eighteen months)(see E, 5), by the end of this period there are already signsthat he is broadening the concept. By the early 1950s Lacan no longer regards it simplyas a moment in the life of the infant, but sees it as also representing a permanent structureof subjectivity, the paradigm of the IMAGINARY order; it is a stadium (stade) in whichthe subject is permanently caught and captivated by his own image;

‌‌‌‌　　[the mirror stage is]a phenomenon to which I assign a twofold value. Inthe first place, it has historical value as it marks a decisive tumning-point inthe mental development of the child. In the second place, it typifies anessential libidinal relationship with the body-image.

‌‌‌‌　　(Lacan, 1951b:14)

‌‌‌‌　　As Lacan further develops the concept of the mirror stage, the stress falls less on itshistorical value'and ever more on its structural value. Thus by 1956 Lacan can say: Themirror stage is far from a mere phenomenon which occurs in the development of thechild. It illustrates the conflictual nature of the dual relationship' (S4,17).

‌‌‌‌　　The mirror stage describes the formation of the EGO via the process of identification; the ego is the result of identifying with one's own SPECULAR IMAGE. The key to thisphenomenon lies in the prematurity of the human baby: at six months, the baby still lackscoordination. However, its visual system is relatively advanced, which means that it canrecognise itself in the mirror before attaining control over its bodily movements. Thebaby sees its own image as whole (see GESTALT), and the synthesis of this imageproduces a sense of contrast with the uncoordination of the body, which is experienced asa FRAGMENTED BODY; this contrast is first felt by the infant as a rivalry with its ownimage, because the wholeness of the image threatens the subject with fragmentation, andthe mirror stage thereby gives rise to an aggressive tension between the subject and theimage (see AGGRESSIVITY). In order to resolve this aggressive tension, the subjectidentifies with the image; this primary identification with the counterpart is what formsthe ego. The moment of identification, when the subject assumes its image as its own, isdescribed by Lacan as a moment of jubilation (E, 1), since it leads to an imaginary senseof mastery;'[the child's]joy is due to his imaginary triumph in anticipating a degree ofmuscular co-ordination which he has not yet actually achieved' (Lacan, 1951b: 15; see S1,79). However, this jubilation may also be accompanied by a depressive reaction, when the child compares his own precarious sense of mastery with the omnipotence ofthe mother (Ec, 345; S4,186). This identification also involves the ideal ego whichfunctions as a promise of future wholeness which sustains the ego in anticipation.

‌‌‌‌　　The mirror stage shows that the ego is the product of misunderstanding (meconnaissance) and the site where the subject becomes alienated from himself. It represents the introduction of the subject into the imaginary order. However, the mirrorstage also has an important symbolic dimension. The symbolic order is present in thefigure of the adult who is carrying or supporting the infant. The moment after the subjecthas jubilantly assumed his image as his own, he tumns his head round towards this adult, who represents the big Other, as if to call on him to ratify this image (Lacan, 1962-3: seminar of 28 November 1962).

‌‌‌‌　　The mirror stage is also closely related to narcissism, as the story of Narcissus clearlyshows (in the Greek myth, Narcissus falls in love with his own reflection).