前者 （被誰）屬外，後者（被）（內化了什麼） 屬內，有趣的是，既已（被）內化，你遂以為，那就是你，的唯一可能，所以你會，不捨的說，如果我不這樣，我就不是我，意思是說，你遂不膽，失去那個，帶來無限魔難糾結的，所謂 （so called) 自己和關係，
至此，你可以理解，心理治療，關鍵詞，就是「內化」（internalization)，和它帶來的魔難糾結 （perils)，
弔詭的是，若無內化在先，你根本不存在，
好消息是，內化永遠有其裂縫（有懈可擊），所以你仍有望，炸掉三峽大壩，恢復長江生機，
內即是外，外即是內，
可見，釐清內外，有多麼，難以道盡，
內化，問的是，你是誰 （who are you)，你是什麼作的 (what are you)，你是怎麼被作出來的 (how were you made of)，
客體關係理論，講的就是，你是客體關係作的 （you are made of object relations)，
關係學派精神分析，講的就是，你是你和他者發生的事件作的 （you are made of inter-personal events)，
菊次郎十六式，講的就是，你是宇宙塵埃作的 （you are made of cosmic dust)，
意思是說，前者，治療者，就是客體，就是關係；次者，治療者，就是他者，就是事件；後者，治療者，就是宇宙，就是塵埃，
至此，你不禁長嘆，治療者，詐（乍） 現人身，何以得以，以宇宙，以塵埃，行世，
意思是說，菊次郎十六式，何其不可行矣，
這時，你在五結，看著遠方，暗夜沙洲，漁火點點，你不禁覺悟，你的治療者，就是暗夜，就是沙洲，就是漁火，就是隱而不顯的繁星，
至于拉岡，他會說，客體關係是想像，語言是象徵，一針見血的語言，就是一窺真實的事件，意思是說，他的位置，界于上述，前者到次者的半途 （半途就是，只強調事件，但少了關係學派最喜歡的互相演出性）（mutual enactment)，意思是說，拉岡基本上還算守規矩的安全 （play safe)，他不會跟他的病人，一起燃燒起來，燒成灰燼，我想，這是因為，巴黎的夜空，見不到星星，意思是說，拉岡只有介語言操弄的結構主義，但沒有超過語言盡頭的宇宙論，勉強 objet petit a， Le sinthome，jouissance，算是打算，趨近那個盡頭，意思是說，schizoanalysis 義在跨過那個盡頭，逕往宇宙虛空而去 （interstellar)，
當然，以上，是我誤會的拉岡，意思是說，他和他的病人，的確曾經，一起燃燒起來，意思是說，前者加上次者，看著後者，是關于治療，最大的恭維，意思是說，貫穿前次後者的，就是陌生人的善意，或正確的說，是漠然 （indifferent) 宇宙的陌生人善意，意思是說，給漠然宇宙帶來生命的，就是陌生人的善意，意思是說，菊次郎十六式，就是給漠然宇宙帶來生命的陌生人的善意，
Another example of Lacan’s clinical work comes from the documen-
tary Rendez-vous chez Lacan (G. Miller, 2011). Suzanne Hommel, born in
Germany in 1938, witnessed the rise of the Nazis as a young girl. She lived
through World War II in a state of constant horror, hungry even as Hitler
“promised bread,” wishing to run away from the terror that haunted her
dreams. In her first session with Lacan, she asks “if it was possible to cure me
of this suffering,” to which he responded with his first “interpretation.” Lacan
looked at her “in this way that made me understand I would have to live with
this for the rest of my life.” A later session in which she recounts the dreams
tormenting her bears quoting at length,
… I told him, ‘I wake up every morning at 5 o’clock… [when] the Gestapo
came to get the Jews in their houses.’ At that moment Lacan jumped up from
his chair… and gave me an extremely gentle caress on my cheek. I understood
it as ‘geste à peau’ [gesture to skin] … a very tender… extraordinarily tender
gesture. And that surprise, it didn’t diminish the pain but it made it something
else… years later, when I recall that gesture, I can still feel it on my cheek. It
was a gesture as well which was an appeal to humanity…
Lacan’s tenderness came through not in words, but action. What makes
this an interpretation evoking a “chance encounter” is his non-verbal use of
the signifier. The Real irrupts into Hommel’s experience and Lacan springs,
the Ferenczian in me would say, spontaneously responds, with a gesture that
transforms the traumatic association. She is struck with surprise —a bit of
Real—deriving a new association, “geste à peau,” or “gesture to skin,” which
phonetically in French sounds like “Gestapo.” Lacan’s surprising responsive-
ness did not erase her pain but allowed her to bear it through her sinthome ,
a memory of tenderness restoring her humanity. （Gaztambide, 2024, pp. 140-141)
Cf. https://radiolacan.com/en/podcast/interview-with-susanne-hommel/1
