意義的浮現：自由素描與意識的探索

Manifestation of Meaning in the Exploration of Free Drawing

自由素描(free drawing)是英國精神分析師梅立恩‧糜爾納(Marion Milner)根據自由聯想技法而創制的一種表達方式。自由聯想技法的前提是：任何語言都有可能承載無意識的表達。在不拘主題、不定畫意的狀態下，以簡單的畫具任意塗抹，而後在圖畫中可以「美學地」看出某種有待完成的形式，或可以「分析地」看出一些雖無意識但有意義的表達。這種技法和藝術史上出現的自動技法(automatism)相似，但自由素描本來的目的卻剛好不是藝術，而只是一種類藝術的玩耍，它的作品本不是要作為藝術品而存在，而毋寧是要讓「非藝術」的人得以毫不在乎地流露被壓抑的心靈內容。自1992 年起，作者曾經帶領一些學生嘗試作自由素描。1996年作者率同一群學生將自由素描的作品作成一次公開展覽，自由素描在此被當作藝術作品而展示。有些作品具有可觀的藝術性質，有些則似乎不然。但反過來說，那些非常令人驚異而有趣的作品並不一定最能引發晤談時的話題。Barnaby Barratt (1993)曾經解釋自由聯想技法的意義在於work-through（通透），也就是說，「以作品來穿透」被壓抑的心靈內容，但他也提出：對自由聯想論述之更進一步的理解應是work andplay through and against（以玩耍的工作來穿透並對抗）壓抑的論述結構。回顧這幾年使用自由素描技法而帶出的一些協同作透（工作及作品），吾人可以用心理治療的過程來理解，但也可以用美學的穿透來理解，雖然使用這兩種理解模式所得的意義大不相同。在本文的後半段，作者提出了三個發現和問題，用以作為往後進一步討論的基礎：講話的方式與精神分析知識、更接近於講話的圖畫、象徵的形成。

Marion Milner’s free drawing is a variation of the free association technique, and the premise of which is that all verbal and non-verbal expressions may carry a certain unconscious content. When one draws with simple instruments with no themes and no sense of art intended, there will be some meaningful expression in it, though one may be unaware of it. This needs to be read analytically.The free drawing technique is similar to what is called “automatic painting technique” in modern art history, yet what is practiced in free drawing happens not to be art, but rather quasi-art, or play. The work of free drawing is not meant to be artistic, but to let the non-art people express what has been repressed in a carefree manner. In the past several years, the present author has led some of his psychology of art (undergraduate and graduate) classes to exercise free drawing. Two types of processes have been attempted: one with supervision, one without. For the former, there is weekly instructor-student meeting, talking mainly about the work of drawing. For the latter, there is only a presentation and discussion session at the end of semester. A typical question raised in the discussion session was: “What the hell is it?” In 1996, guided by the present author and other faculty members, the students organized a free drawing exhibition. The works for analysis were turned into works of art. Some of the works were indeed spectacular, but others were not. However, those amazing, interesting works were not necessarily the ones that provoked the most profound analytic interviews. Barnaby Barratt’s (1993) account for the free-associative method is that it is precisely the process of “working through”, nevertheless, he further points out that “free association” is actually “[working and playing] through and against the repressive discourse”. In reviewing the present author’s adoption of the free drawing technique, one may employ a psychotherapy model or an aesthetics model, though they are quite distinct from each other. In the latter part of the present article, the author raised 3 discoveries and questions, which may serve as the basis for future discussions: The way of talking and the knowledge of psychoanalysis, pictures that are closer to talking, and the formation of symbols.