以無之名：從拉岡的精神分析角度探討《哈姆雷特》中的無題式結構

In the “None” of the Father: A Lacanian Analysis of the A-thetic Structure in Shakespeare’s Hamlet

張鎮龍(Cheng-long Chang)

指導教授 ： 廖朝陽

國立臺灣大學/文學院/外國語文學研究所/博士(2017年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201700662

摘要

本論文將《哈姆雷特》視為主體精神裝置內部盛載意符結構的虛擬空間。筆者由拉岡精神分析中的「父之名」理論出發，檢視此一意符空間中特有的無題式結構。筆者主張此一精神裝置中的父之名未能發揮定錨點的特定功能，導致意符結構無法在劇中主角的精神現實中產出時間及空間的在場存有，最終使得哈姆雷特精神現實中的意符結構倒退至在場存有之前的延異狀態。
首章探討「劇中的父親角色」。筆者主張拉岡主體理論中的父之名並非現實生活中的血肉之軀，而是標定母親慾望的父親隱喻，其功能是主體結構中負責組建意符結構的關鍵定錨點。劇中父親鬼魂的出現揭示哈姆雷特精神現實中的父之名運作不良，其具體效應即為哈姆雷特精神世界裏「時間斷裂」的主要困境。
次章檢視「父親復仇命令中的雙關結構」。劇中母親在前夫死後迅速改嫁其夫之弟，其慾望的曖昧不明導致哈姆雷特受困於母親慾望及父親隱喻替代作用的中間地帶，最終致使哈姆雷特精神現實中的父親鬼魂對其子發出語帶雙關、自相矛盾的復仇命令。此一矛盾命令置哈姆雷特於加害與被害、過去與未來的尷尬地位，迫使哈姆雷特試圖在「生或死」的獨白中重新組建新的意符系統。
三章呈現「哈姆雷特重新探尋父之名的過程及結果」。擺盪於加害與被害、過去與未來之間的哈姆雷特最終了解，父之名運作不良而在意符空間所形成的空白缺口乃導因於母親慾望的曖昧不明。哈姆雷特因而改變復仇策略而接受一切，在受命前往英國的船上得以旁觀其主體生命歷程及其肩負使命，最終得以使用其父之印戒作為父之名來重新組建其精神現實中的意符結構。
簡言之，本文從父之名的角度檢視《哈姆雷特》的意符空間所呈現出的無題式結構，由此解釋此劇在批評史上廣受重視卻又莫衷一是的特殊現象。

關鍵字

莎士比亞 ； 《哈姆雷特》 ； 拉岡 ； 精神分析 ； 父之名 ； 德希達 ； 解構 ； 延異

並列摘要

In this dissertation, I propose a Lacanian analysis of the a-thetic structure of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Adopting the Lacanian theory of the Name of the Father as a critical tool, I will treat Hamlet as a psychic apparatus in which the Name of the Father is absent from the signifying system of Hamlet’s psychic reality. Without the Name of the Father working as the quilting point to regulate the signifying system of this psychic apparatus, the signifying space of Hamlet’s psychic reality drifts back to the a-thetic structure dominated by the endless movement of inscription between presence and absence characteristic of Derridean différance.
The first chapter, “The Father Between Being and Non-Being,” sets out to demonstrate that the Name of the Father in Lacanian theory is not a living person, but a paternal metaphor of the Desire of the Mother, a dead father working as the quilting point to regulate the signifying activity for the production of the presence of time and space in the subject’s psychic reality. The appearance of the ghost lingering between being and non-being thus indicates the malfunction of the Name of the Father in the signifying system of Hamlet’s psychic reality, in which “the time is out of joint” between past and future for Hamlet.
The second chapter, “The Father’s Equivocal Voice in the Demand for Revenge,” reexamines the relation between the “indifference” in the Desire of the Mother on the one hand, and the Derridean “différance” inherent in the father’s demand for revenge on the other. In her hasty remarriage with Claudius, Gertrude demonstrates an attitude of “indifference” in Hamlet’s psychological world, thus bringing the consequence of différance in the father’s demand for revenge in Hamlet’s psychic reality. Given this equivocal demand for revenge, Hamlet is situated in an ambiguous position between victim and victimizer on the one hand, and between past and future on the other. Without a desire to guide him in the psychic reality, Hamlet tries to reconstruct the virtual space of signifying system of his psychic reality with his “To Be or Not to Be” soliloquy. Without the Name of the Father working as the quilting point to uphold the signifying system, however, there is always a gap in the signifying space of Hamlet’s psychic reality; with this gap, Hamlet’s attempt to reconstruct the signifying system of his psychic reality is doomed to failure.
The third chapter, “In Search of the Father Outside the Desire of the Mother,” demonstrates that the appearance of the gap due to the absence of the Name of the Father ultimately brings the signifying structure of Hamlet’s psychic reality down to a vanishing point of the infinite regress characteristic of mirror reflection. Finally realizing that it is the ambiguity in the Desire of the Mother that is behind the vanishing point of his psychic reality, Hamlet adopts the position of the object instead of the subject in his task of revenge, thus accepting everything arranged by Claudius and Gertrude. In this potion as an active object, Hamlet is given an alternative leverage point to restructure the signifying structure of psychic reality, by rewriting the purloined “letter” of Claudius with the sign-et of Old Hamlet as the Name of the Father.
In sum, by taking Hamlet as a psychic apparatus in which the Name of Father is absent from the signifying system of Hamlet’s psychic reality, I highlight the “a-thetic” structure embedded within the play, thus trying to explain the “uncanny timeliness” of Hamlet in the history of literary criticism.

並列關鍵字

Shakespeare ； Hamlet ； Lacan ； psychoanalysis ； the Name of the Father ； Derrida ； deconstruction ； différance

參考文獻

- - -. “The Mirror Stage as Formative of the I Function as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience.” Écrits: The First Complete Edition in English. Trans. Bruce Fink. New York: W. W. Norton, 2006. 75-81.

Wilson, Elizabeth A.. Neural Geographies: Feminism and the Microstructure of Cognition. London: Routledge, 1998

Samuels, Robert. “Art and the Position of the Analyst.” Reading Seminar XI: Lacan’s Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. Ed. Richard Feldstein, Bruce Fink, and Maire Jaanus. Albany: State U of New York P, 1995. 183-86.

Lupton, Julia Reinhard and Kenneth Reinhard. After Oedipus: Shakespeare in Psychoanalysis. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1993.

- - -. “Beyond the ‘Reality Principle.’” Écrits: The First Complete Edition in English. Trans. Bruce Fink. New York: W. W. Norton, 2006. 58-74