Skip to content

‌‌‌‌  英:preoedipal phase; 法:stade precedipien

‌‌‌‌  前俄狄浦斯期是先于俄狄浦斯情结 (OEDIPUS COMPLEX)形成的心理性欲发展阶段。该术语在很晚的时候才在弗洛伊德的著作中出现于他对女性性欲进行讨论的语境之下 (Freud, 1931b).

‌‌‌‌  在拉康之前,前俄狄浦斯期通常都被表现为母亲与孩子之间的二元关系 (DUAL RELATION), 此种二元关系先于任何可能在其中作为中介的第三项而存在。然而,拉康则指出,这样的一种取径具有使此一概念在精神分析理论中变得无法设想的缺点。精神分析仅仅处理的是结构,而结构则要求有至少三个项,因而被表现为一种纯粹二元关系的前俄狄浦斯期,便“无法从分析的角度来构想”(E, 197)。孩子从来都不是完全与母亲单独在一起的,因为始终存在着一个第三项 (S4,240-1).

‌‌‌‌  因此,当拉康谈到前俄狄浦斯期的时候,他便不是将其呈现为一种二元关系,而是呈现为一种三角结构 (S4,81)。在前俄狄浦斯三角中在母亲与孩子之间的二元关系里作为中介的第三个元素,便是阳具 (PHALLUS), 即在一系列交换中循环于母亲与孩子之间的一个想象的对象。在1957一1958年度的研讨班上,拉康没有把这个想象三角形说成前俄狄浦斯期,而是将其称作俄狄浦斯情结的第一“时间”。

‌‌‌‌  无论被描述为前俄狄浦斯期,还是被描述为俄狄浦斯情结本身中的一个时刻,母亲、孩子与阳具的想象三角形都出现在幼儿察觉到母亲身上有某种缺失的时候。幼儿认识到母亲并不完全满足于跟自己单独在一起,而是欲望着某种别的东西(即阳具)。于是,孩子便会试图成为母亲的阳具,这就使他卷入了一场充满引诱的诱惑性游戏,在其中孩子“从来都不真正存在于他所在之处,也从来都不完全缺席于他所不在之处”(S4,193: 亦见:S4,223-4)。在1956一1957年度的研讨班上,拉康分析了小汉斯的个案 (reud, 1909b), 他说明了这场游戏何以会让小汉斯感到暂时性的满足,并且还指出其中没有任何固有的东西可以终止这一前俄狄浦斯式的天堂 (S4,226)。然而,在某一时刻上,某种别的东西介入了进来,从而将一个焦虑的不和谐音符引入了这场游戏。这种“别的东西”便是在幼儿手淫中表现出来的冲动的第一次搅动 (S4,225-6)。实在的器官以这样的方式介入进来,便把想象三角形转变成了一场致命的游戏,这是一项不可能的任务,孩子在其中完全是全能的饕餮母亲 (devouring mother)的独断欲望的牺牲品 (S4,69,195)。只有通过父亲作为第四项的干预性介入,只有通过父亲基于象征性法则而正当地宣布自己对于阳具的占用,孩子才能够从这场致命的游戏中被解救出来

‌‌‌‌  拉康对于前俄狄浦斯期的兴趣,不仅在于它给俄狄浦斯情结铺路的作用,而且还在于所有性倒错皆起源于此一时期的事实 (S4,193)。性倒错 (PERVERSION)始终都涉及在前俄狄浦斯三角中对于另一项的某种认同,无论认同的是母亲,还是想象的阳具 (或者两者皆是,譬如在恋物癖中)。

‌‌‌‌  (stade precdipien) The preoedipal phase is the period of psychosexual development priorto the formation of the OEDIPUS COMPLEX. The term emerges very late in Freud'swork, in the context of his discussion of female sexuality (Freud, 1931b).

‌‌‌‌  Before Lacan, the preoedipal phase was usually represented as a DUAL RELATIONbetween mother and child existing prior to any third term which could mediate it. However, Lacan argues that such an approach has the disadvantage of rendering theconcept unthinkable in psychoanalytic theory. Psychoanalysis deals exclusively withstructure, which requires a minimum of three terms, and thus a preoedipal phase which isrepresented as a purely dual relation 'cannot be conceived of in analytic terms' (E, 197). The child is never completely alone with the mother, since there is always a third term (S4,240-1).

‌‌‌‌  Hence when Lacan speaks of a preoedipal phase, he presents it not as a dual relationbut as a triangle (S4,81). The third element in the preoedipal triangle, which mediates thedual relation between the mother and the child, is the PHALLUS, an imaginary objectwhich circulates between them in a series of exchanges. In the seminar of 1957-8 Lacanspeaks of this imaginary triangle not as a preoedipal phase but as the first 'time'of the Oedipus complex.

‌‌‌‌  Whether described as preoedipal, or as a moment in the Oedipus complex itself, theimaginary triangle of mother, child and phallus arises when the infant perceives a lack inthe mother. The infant realises that the mother is not completely satisfied with him alone, but desires something else (the phallus). The child then seeks to be the phallus for themother, which involves him in a seductive game of lures in which the child 'is neverreally there at the place where he is, and is never completely absent from the place wherehe is not' (S4,193; see also S4,223-4). In the seminar of 1956-7, where Lacan analysesthe case of Little Hans (Freud, 1909b), he shows how, for a while, this game is satisfyingfor Hans, and argues that there is nothing inherent in it that would put an end to thispreoedipal paradise (S4,226). However, at some point something else intervenes whichintroduces a discordant note of anxiety into the game. This 'something else'is the firststirring of the drive, which manifests itself in infantile masturbation (S4,225-6). Theintervention of the real organ in this way transforms the imaginary triangle into a deadlygame, an impossible task, in which the child is completely prey to the arbitrary desire ofthe omnipotent devouring mother (S4,69,195). The child is only saved from this deadlygame by the intervention of the father as a fourth term, the father who rightfully claimspossession of the phallus on the basis of a symbolic law.

‌‌‌‌  The interest of the preoedipal phase for Lacan does not only lie in its function inpaving the way for the Oedipus complex, but also in the fact that all the perversions havetheir origin in this phase (S4,193). PERVERSION always involves some kind ofidentification with another term in the preoedipal triangle, whether it be the mother, orthe imaginary phallus (or both, as in fetishism).