漢娜西格爾（Hanna Segal) 談夢

1.    Freud is often misquoted; he never said the dream isthe royal road to unconscious; but he did say that the interpretation of thedream is the royal road to the unconscious.

弗洛伊德經(jīng)常被錯誤地引用，他從沒有說過夢是通向無意識的王道，但他確實說過夢的解釋是通向無意識的王道。

2.    Nowadays, when we understand much more about theimportance of the transference and the developing relationship between thepatient and the analyst, we are also concerned with the function of the dream.Why does the patient have this dream and tell it to us in a particular way at aparticular time?

現(xiàn)在，我們對移情以及病人與分析師關系的重要性了解很多了，此時我們也關注夢的功能。病人為什么做了這樣的夢以及為什么這個時候以這種方式告訴我們？

3.    Freud spoke of a dream as night-time hallucination. ButI think, in fact, that not all dreams are night-time hallucinations. Some arelike that; they are felt as very concrete. They sort of stay in the mind. Theiruse (I’m generalizing here) is not to establish a communication – a dream ascommunication between the unconscious phantasy and our conscious mind – but onthe contrary, to get rid of mental content. Bion speaks of patients who treattheir dream with shame, as though they had defecated or urinated in their beds.And in those situations dreams are not used to elaborate symbolically and tocommunicate to oneself or the analyst. They’re very close to hallucination. It’ssomething used to get rid of our own experience, by putting it outside. 

弗洛伊德說過夢是夜間幻覺，但是，我認為，事實上，并不是所有的夢都是夜間幻覺。有些是這樣的，它們感覺著很具體。它們有點長在心里。它們并不是被用來交流的——夢作為無意識幻想和有意識的頭腦進行交流的方式——而是相反，被用了消除掉精神內(nèi)容。比昂談起過這樣的病人，他們對待與羞恥有關的夢就像他們尿了床似的。在這種情形下，夢不是被用來做象征性解釋也不是來來和自己或分析師做交流的。它們非常接近于幻覺。這就像通過擱置起來的方式，除掉我們自己那些（如羞恥的）經(jīng)驗。

4.    I once had a patient who wrote down his dreams; hehad notebooks and books of them; he had an “agenda” in the analysis to gothrough his dreams. We were always years behind his agenda. He would come andread the dream and tell it to me and in this way it was as though the dream hadnothing to do with him. What was particularly striking was that he was veryoften getting rid of more positive parts of his psychic personality because those were the painful ones. For instance, he was extremely fixated on hismother; when she died, he had a lot of dreams which were extremely moving. He putthem in his little diary. This was not a way of working through his mourning,but a means of getting rid of it. And it comes very close to hallucinationbecause then dreams are used not to elaborate a psychic reality but to get ridof it by putting it in an image, telling it, invading the analyst’s mind withthe image, not really elaborating the problem. They are used for action – to seduce, to impress, to frighten. So we pay much more attention not only to the content, but also to what is the actual function that the dream performs. I won’t add more on this now because I’ve written a great deal on this.

我曾經(jīng)有個病人，他總是會寫下自己的夢。他擁有很多這樣的筆記本記錄這些夢。他在分析中有個日常安排專門來分析他的夢，我們這樣做了好幾年。他會來閱讀他的夢，把夢告訴我，這種方式就像這個夢與他沒什么關系一樣。尤其引人注目的是他經(jīng)常因為心里痛苦的部分而除掉那些更為積極的部分。比如，他極其依戀他的母親，當她死時，他做了很多很多令人感動的夢。他把這些夢記錄在他的小筆記本里。這不是修通悲傷的方式，而是一種除掉悲傷的方式。這樣的方式非常接近是幻覺，因為，這樣的話，這些夢不是被用來闡述心理現(xiàn)實，而是消除它們，通過把它們放入意象中，傾訴，用意象侵犯分析師的頭腦，而不是真正地闡述這個問題。他們被訴諸行動——誘惑，給人深刻印象，恐嚇。因此，我們不僅要更加注意內(nèi)容，而且也注意夢所扮演的實際功能。這方面我不在多說了，因為已經(jīng)寫過很多相關的東西了。

5.    Freud used to give a sort of symbolic explanation;he would translate the symbol. We don’t do that now; one might sometimes justuse one fragment of the dream that the patient has brought. We don’t interpretsymbols in the same immediate automatic way. We don’t have a dictionary ofsymbols. One has to wait to know what this symbol means to this patient. Also onehas to be very watchful whether it really is a symbol or whether it’s felt as amore concrete thing. Whether this is contentious is difficult to say.

弗洛伊德曾經(jīng)給出了一些象征性解釋，他會翻譯象征的含義。我們現(xiàn)在不這樣做了，有時也許只使用病人帶來的夢的一個片段。我們不再機械地直接地解釋象征的含義。我們沒有關于象征的詞典。治療師必須等待了解這個象征對于病人的意義是什么。另外，治療師惡必須非常警惕，它是否真的是一個象征，或覺得它是一個更加具體的東西。

6.    Whatever culture we have is an outcome of pastculture. The past is always with us, that’s clear, whether in dreams or in theculture. But I don’t think, as Freud did, that we have got a sort of racialmemory of things in the past. I think it’s more that the current situation andenvironment carry the past to which we react.

無論什么樣的文化都是過去文化的一種結果。過去總是伴隨著我們，這很清楚，無論是在夢這領域還是在文化領域。但是，我并不像弗洛伊德那樣，即我們擁有過去的種族記憶。我更加相信，現(xiàn)在情境攜帶著我們對過去的反應。

7.    Speculation can be dangerous in analysis. About dreamsin history, nobody who has any sense would say that that dream means this orthat for sure. But one might still speculate – knowing something of an artist’shistory and his preoccupations. One can have some freedom of thought here; wecan speculate, but we cannot say that because such and such symbols were there,it means anything for sure. 

在分析中，推測可能是危險的。在歷史上，關于夢，沒有任何人可以確定地說那個夢就意味著是這個或是那個。但是我們可以推測——了解一個藝術家的歷史和他的偏見什么的。他可以自由地思考；我們可以推測，但我們不能說因為這個和這個象征，所以它就確定的是這個意思。

8.    Regarding the physical phenomena, as far as I know,there is nothing that really would contradict our view. I think at some point amuch greater synthesis has to be made.

關于自然現(xiàn)象，據(jù)我所知，還沒有什么真正地與我們的觀點相矛盾。我認為，在某種意義上來說，只是需要更大綜合。

9.    Freud said that children’s dream are wish fulfillmentsand without any conflict. I don’t think now that analysis of children bearsthat out. We know that their dreams are as complicated and show the samemechanisms as adults ones.

弗洛伊德說兒童的夢是愿望的達成而且沒有沖突。我現(xiàn)在不這么認為，對兒童的分析已經(jīng)證明這點。我們知道他們的夢和成人的夢一樣復雜，機制也相同。

摘自Daniel Pick and Lyndal Roper對剛過完80歲生日的漢娜所做的訪談：《精神分析、夢和歷史：與漢娜西格爾的訪談》（Psychoanalysis, dreams, history: an interview with Hanna Segal）