黃宗慧2006-07-252018-05-292006-07-252018-05-292005-07-31http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/10186精神分析與女性主義或性別研究在許多議題上都曾有過交會，例如陽物是否 仍不脫與陽具的糾葛、因此仍是以男性為中心的論述，又或者拉岡所謂「女性不 存在」的宣言是否等於將女性放逐於符號層次之外等等，本計畫則選擇從精神分 析與性別研究在歇斯底里與戀物癖這兩個概念上的對話著手。以歇斯底里及戀物 癖作為研究的切入點，是因為晚近性別研究的趨勢中，頗有呼籲女性以戀物機制 取代歇斯底里的走向：過去女性主義者曾經將歇斯底里視為一種挑戰父權論述的 方式，例如少女朵拉對佛洛伊德診斷的抗拒，以及她最後終止治療的姿態，都曾 是女性主義者津津樂道的一種女性抗爭範例，而在越來越多的相關研究指出歇斯 底里者本身畢竟處於一種為症狀所苦的狀態之後，以歇斯底里為抗爭方式的呼籲 之聲也似乎隨之減弱，而佛洛伊德所指出的，很少就診求助的戀物癖，則因為看 似頗能自得其樂而成為不少女性主義者注意的目標，他們開始思索戀物機制可能 開展的積極意義，以及以女性戀物癖或女同性戀戀物癖來建構主體性的可能，雖 然戀物癖在原本精神分析的脈絡下是只有男性才會出現的症狀，女性主義者力圖 證明女性戀物癖的存在因此也引起一番反省—堅持女性也可以出現戀物癖會不 會正是一種陽具欽羨？—但諸如Elizabeth Grosz 或E. L. McCallum 仍傾向於發展 戀物癖的顛覆力。本計畫以此種轉向為起點，思考過去以歇斯底里為抗爭策略的 論述是否的確已「不合時宜」；而如果歇斯底里這種策略正如這個精神疾病名稱 一樣已經過時，那麼拉岡所謂的「歇斯底里者的宣訴」(hysteric’s discourse)這種 慾望結構能否給我們什麼樣的啟發？另一方面，本計畫亦探討性別研究與精神分 析理論在戀物議題上所開展出來的對話，思考這些對戀物癖重讀與挪用的策略， 是否能處理戀物癖所涉及的否認現實與攻擊慾等問題。This project seeks to reconsider the contributions of psychoanalysis to modern feminism/gender studies by scrutinizing the debates over whether psychoanalysis can serve as a pertinent interpretative framework to address the issues of sexuality and sexual difference. As we know, while some critics cast no doubt on the clinical effectiveness of psychoanalysis, some look askance at its validity for its proclivity to condoning or reinforcing the male-dominated compulsory heterosexuality. For example, the Lacanian assmption “Woman does not exist”(la femme n’existe pas), which points to the impossibility of defining women, sounds dubious for some feminists as it runs the risk of further excluding women from the symbolic. Instead of directly addressing the long-standing debates, this project takes fetishism and hysteria as two cases in point to reconsider the liaison between feminism and psychoanalysis. As there are more and more feminists who believe that fetishism and/or hysteria can be employed to deconstruct the phallogocentric psychoanalytic theory, it is necessary to probe into how they approach these two clinical structures from a gendered perspective. Do hysterical women successfully debunk the patriarchal discourse as they constantly refute the analysts’interpretation of their symptoms and seem to prove themselves good at exposing the lack of the big Other? Do fetishists know well how to disavow the unwelcome reality and thus have the potential to destabilize the patriarchal imposition such as normative sexual division? Aiming to examine whether the feminist re-readings are instrumental in locating the lacunae in psychoanalysis or sometimes they themselves should be faulted for misreading Freud’s and Lacan’s theories, this project not only explores fetishism and hysteria as psychoanalytic concepts but also penetrate into feminists’gendered readings of them. Can the structure of hysteria shed light on our understanding of woman’s desire? Will female fetishism effectively subvert patriarchy without falling prey to aggressive transference? Should women choose between being hysterics and fetishists in order to subvert the patriarchal structure? Is it possible that women may start from their “impossible”position to appropriate the feminine jouissance and further, to challenge the rigid symbolic order? If the questions can be explored more thoroughly, I believe the old debates concerning the ambivalent connection between penis and phallus, between the traumatic woman and the real, impossible woman, will be resolved to a great extent. Under such circumstances, the liaison between psychoanalysis and feminism and the related controversies, hopefully, may be pursued in a more fruitful way.application/pdf673547 bytesapplication/pdfzh-TW國立臺灣大學外國語文學系暨研究所精神分析性別研究歇斯底里戀物癖小對物psychoanalysisgender studieshysteriafetishismobject a[SDGs]SDG5reporthttp://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw/bitstream/246246/10186/1/932411H002090.pdf