Freud created his concept of 'the id' in an effort to help clarify his image of the unconscious. However, paradoxically, in doing so, he created some new conceptual ambiguity -- and a reduced perception/conceptualization of the unconscious.
Problem Number 1: How can the id be viewed as being a metaphysical 'structural container' -- containing the 'instincts' on the one hand -- and then be viewed as the sum total of the instincts themselves on the other hand, not to mention being viewed as a 'primitive, narcissistic, uncivil mind-brain' with the sole function of satisfying these same instincts from a third perspective. That's basically three different views or definitions of the id all rolled into one.
It's like saying, from a male perspective, that the prostate and semen are the same thing, and/or the testicles and sperm are the same thing -- with a primitive, narcissistic, uncivil masculine mind-brain controlling the functions of both which many people jokingly say that there is. How many times have we heard the expression that men have two brains: one above their neck, and the other below their waist.
Consequently, I justified the existence of a distinction between: 1. the id; 2. the id vault; and 'the id ego'. But this doesn't go quite far enough....
Problem 2: In reducing the unconscious to 'the id', Freud screened out -- or at least failed to clearly distinguish (at least to my knowledge) other important elements of the unconscious such as memories and traumacies as well as fantasies and as well as 'functional compartments' that have functions other than that of the id.
What at one time in 'The Interpretation of Dreams' Freud called 'The Dream Censor', I call 'The Dream, (Fantasy, and Nightmare) Weaver' allowing for the fact that 'dream, fantasy, and nightmare symbolization can, and often do in many dreams (the manifest content), both hide and allude to their underlying meaning, fears, and/or wishes (the latent content). I do not subscribe to Freud's one-sided theory that all dreams reflect wish-fulfillments although it might be more appropriately stated that dreams often reflect cathartic emotional releases. Whereas psychoanalysis in its very beginning stage (Breuer and Anna O.) was called 'chimney sweeping' and 'the talking cure', dreams can be viewed as a second type of 'chimney sweeping' using 'hallucinated picture and/or other forms of sensory symbolization' to clear -- or at least temporarily clear -- our 'Shadow-Id' of its day residue with a generally emotional abreaction or cathartic, working-through, release effect...
From an integrative DGB-Gestalt perspective, our dreams and/or nightmares and/or fantasies help us to work through -- or at least temporarily and/or partly work through -- our 'Shadow-Id' emotional unfinished business. In 'Post-Stress Traumacy Syndrome', this 'working through' process may take a long, or very long time -- in fact, we may never completely work through the 'perceived traumacy' in the course of our whole lives....such as in the case of war veterans....Thus, the underlying reason for what Freud called 'the repetition compulsion' -- i.e., we 'repeat' in order to work through either an 'obsessional desire' and/or an 'unfinished, unworked through, 'ego-traumacy' or 'narcissistic (self-esteem) injury'.
The reason that I choose to use the term 'Shadow-Id' rather than just 'Id' is that 'The Shadow-Id' allows for the conceptual visualization of 'memories, traumacies, ego-traumacies, and narcissistic fixations conflating/integrating/synthesizing with id impulses/drives/desires/fantasies'. That is a part of the clinical equation that Freud basically left out when he abandoned his 'reality-traumacy-seduction triadic theory', to be less appropriately be replaced in 1920 with his 'entropy and death instinct theory' although that might in some cases of aging patients be a part of the clinical equation as well. Aging cells, organs, cell-functions, and organ functions lead to less and less energy over time (oxidation and entropy) and eventually death. Our bodies are born from the vitamins and minerals of the land, and to the land, do our vitamins and minerals -- and us -- eventually return.... I almost sound like Freud's mom - and Freud. And the 'constancy principle', 'the conservation of energy', 'entropy theory', 'death instinct theory' -- but I don't abandon reality, traumacy, and sexual traumacy like Freud did.
When our 'Shadow-Id-Ego-Vault-Energy' (which I will shorten to 'sieve energy') is 'unbound' or 'leaking' -- like a 'sieve' -- then this 'unbound energy' is going to have an impact on the psychodynamics in 'The Narcissistic-Hedonistic Ego', as well as 'The Central-Mediating Ego', 'The Shadow-Id (Private) Ego', and 'The Personna (Public) Ego', as well as encouraging and/or criticizing elements coming down on us from our 'Superego Complex'.
'Sieve energy' takes the place of Freud's concept of 'libido' (sexual energy) as well as Jung's concept of libido (life energy). In contrast, 'sieve energy' can be any kind of mixture of love, lust, aggression, anger, rage, hate, anxiety, creativity, destruction, construction, deconstruction.....
Sieve energy can surface in the form of different types of 'allusions to immediacy' and/or 'allusions to transference' such as dreams, jokes, fantasies, neurotic symptoms, projections, sublimations....anything that both partly hides and partly alludes to underlying elements of our 'Shadow-Id Complex'...
Sieve energy often tends to come out in an allusionary, partly restrained and censured, partly released, symbolic fashion...in essence, some form of 'compromise-formation'.
However, under the influence of drugs, alcohol, certain stressors -- internal and/or external -- sieve energy can also 'explode' totally unexpectedly like where did this come from? (I'll let you figure out the sexual metaphor involving the prostate...but the same 'explosive principle' applies for love, anger, rage, hate, aggression, violence...)....
When some sort of reaction from a person seems to come totally out of left or right field -- he or she 'freaks' on you, 'flips out' on you, has a hysterical and/or psychotic breakdown, suddenly turns 'sexual' and/or 'aggressive' on you....you can be sure that you are dealing with some sort of underlying 'Shadow-Id Complex' and/or Shadow-Id-Transference Complex' that the person has totally or partly hid from you.
Enough for tonight.
-- dgb, January 21st, 2012...
-- David Gordon Bain...
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Creations...
-- Are Still in Process....
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Traumacies, Impulses, and Their Viscisitudes: Why Concepts Such as 'The Shadow-Id' (SID) and 'The Shadow-Id Vault' (SIV) Are Important Extensions To Freud's Concept of The Id
I'm going back into my archives here....back to June 9th, 2011...in order to pull up an essay that belongs in this network of essays that I am writing now....
Under revision....Jan. 17th, Jan. 21st, 2012...
...........................................................................
What I would like to do in this essay is to compare and contrast the work of Freud in 1894 (The Neuro-Psychoses of Defense), 1895 (Studies in Hysteria), and 1896 (The Aetiology of Hysteria) with the work of Freud in 1920 (Beyond The Pleasure Principle) and 1923 (The Ego and The Id).
Of particular speculative interest -- and this 'speculation' falls under the category of 'would have', 'could have', 'should have' -- is the question of what might have happened to Psychoanalysis if Freud had written The Ego and The Id in say, 1895 or 1896 rather than in 1923?
Now, obviously, Freud's mindset and abstraction process had not evolved enough in the mid 1890s when he was just getting going with what is usually classified as his 'Pre-Classical' Psychoanalytic thinking to have written The Ego and The Id at such an early date.
But what the question does is to direct us to look at how Freud's 1923 conceptuology of 'the ego', 'the id', and 'the superego' would have mixed -- or not mixed -- with his 'pre-Classcial, reality-traumacy-seduction-repression theory'.
You see, me being the 'post-Hegelian, dialectic, integrative bi-polarity thinker' that I am, I look at the question of 'What would have 'Classical' Psychoanalysis have looked like if Freud had integrated all 46 years of his pre-psychoanalytic and psychoanalytic thinking (1903-1939), rather than throwing the first four years of his work into a 'Dissociation Pit' -- like the 'neurotics' and 'neuroses' he was describing in his clients.
And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. Friedrich Nietzsche
These early, pre-1897, classic Psychoanalytic works listed above need to be reconciled, integrated, and harmonized with his later work -- not treated like Psychoanalsysis suddenly developed its own 'neurotic disorder' with Freud 'repressing' -- or in a better choice of words, 'dissociating' -- the first four professional years of his career. (I dislike the Freudian concept of 'repression' because of its reductionistic and non-empirical nature; my own preferable terminology consists of words like: 'alienating', 'dissociating', 'suppressing', 'restraining', 'splitting', 'avoiding'...trying as much as possible to stay away from the concept of repression except in discussing the way that Freud used this term...for the most part reductionistically and non-empirically...and not in the best interests of Psychoanalysis in my opinion.)
Remember, this is the man -- Freud -- who burned many of his most personal letters from Fliess, and presumably, important others. Indeed, he would have most certainly done the same if he had ever gotten a hold of his own letters to Fliess, but history was smiling on historians in this latter case, not on Freud, and thus, we get a truer picture -- not a 'mythological' one -- of what was happeneing during the crucial early development years of Psychoanalysis.
Freud had a very strong wish to keep most of his private life -- strictly private. But all of his most intimate letters to Fliess have made it through World War ll, and into the history books for philosophers, psycho-theorists and psychoanalytic historians like myself to interpret and evaluate as they choose to.
Masson was the 'golden child' of psychoanalysis at the beginning of the early 1980s who was given the 'key to the vault' to publish all of Freud's very intimate letters to Fliess (before then, the ones that seemed to tarnish Freud's reputation in any way were screened out of publication), but when Masson got into these letters, didn't like what he saw -- and said so -- accusing Freud of 'losing moral courage' around the issue of real childhood memories, specifically, real childhood sexual assault or 'seduction' memories, the main 'protectors' of The Freudian legacy -- mainly his daughter, Anna Freud, and the highly esteemed senior Freudian loyalist, Kurt Eissler -- were obviously berating themselves for letting Masson into The Freudian Archives in the first place because of the disastrous public relations scandal that followed -- Masson, more specifically, accusing Freud of 'backing away' and 'hiding' from the very 'professionally and politically unpopular' subject of childhood sexual abuse after a very volatile, confrontational meeting of The Vienna Psychiatry and Neurology Society on April 21st, 1896, in which Freud read his very famous or infamous paper, depending on your perspective, 'The Aetiology of Hysteria', which connected childhood sexual assault to the overall 'cause' of hysteria. Krafft-Ebing, the leader of the evening meeting called Freud's paper a 'scientific fairy tale'.
I have followed Masson's path through Freud's complete letters to Fliess through 1895 and 1896 in particular, and some of them don't shine a good light on Freud -- particularly the Emma Ekstein medical atrocity, and arguably, Freud's abandonment of his pre-1897 combined 'reality-traumacy-seduction' theory -- especially, IF this 'theory abandonment' reflected a loss of moral courage on Freud's part to stand up to his medical peers and superiors. Granted, they may have had -- indeed, most certainly did have -- 'leverage' over both his professional reputation and his income level relative to 'referring' or 'not referring' patients to him....and Freud had a growing family that he needed to shelter, feed, and clothe -- a type of situation where most of us may have at one point or another in our professional career been told to 'keep something quiet' or risk the consequences...or alternatively, you just know that saying something may not be a good idea relative to keeping your job and/or your career...
Still, regardless, the reputation of both Freud and Psychoanalysis is significantly at stake here. The nuts and bolts of the situation comes down to this moral question: Did Freud turn his back on his clients, particularly his female clients, and betray them -- like Judas? Or did Freud radically change the theory of Psychoanalysis 180 degrees because he believed that this was 'the right' thing to do based on a 're-interpretation of his clinical evidence'?
It is two very complicated, connected questions with both Freud's and Psychoanalysis' reputation and integrity hanging in the balance. It certainly seems like most Psychoanalysts back in the 1980s 'rejected and wrote Masson off as an academic radical' (at least in public, anyway). The position of professional and academic 'non-psychoanalysts' is less clear.
It comes down to whether you believe or not that Freud's whole change in direction of Psychoanalysis from 'reality theory' to 'fantasy theory' was, in effect, a 'cover-up' of chldhood sexual abuse -- or not. The evidence is still not fully clear, and probably never will be. There is evidence to suggest that Freud was in the process of 'changing' his reality theory to fantasy theory as early as December, 1895, which would make the evening of April 21st, 1896 far less dramatically significant.
Freud's creation and writing of 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was also coming hard about this time, and may have also influenced his changeover from reality theory to fantasy theory. There was the Emma Ekstein medical mishap of February, 1895 that was still 'playing in Freud's head -- as 'guilt' -- and from this guilt, may have sprung his concept (or Fliess') of 'longing'....Freud started to call Emma a 'hysterical bleeder' -- a patient who 'bled' because she 'longed' to be back in the presence of her 'male therapist' (presumably Freud), and she 'bled' to 'get his attention'....
That interpretation does not look very good on Freud at all as this was a woman who almost bled to death because Fliess, when he was doing 'the nasal-sexual surgery' (whatever that supposed connection was about) that he shouldn't even have been doing -- left about a foot of medical gauze or more in her nasal cavity, forgot about it, went back from Vienna to Berlin, and it was almost a month later when another doctor, examining Emma's badly infected nasal passage, suddenly found and pulled on the gauze -- and a torrent of blood rushed out after the gauze had been pulled out....And a year later Freud was calling Emma a 'hysterical bleeder'...
All of this is to say that there was 'mixed evidence' as to 'why Freud did what he did' when he started to abandon 'reality theory' for 'fantasy theory'....and some of the evidence isn't good...
Without The Psychoanalytic Establishment ever admitting that Freud may have -- or actually did -- 'screw up' bigtime -- still, it would seem that most Psychoanalysts have quietly left the school of Classical Psychoanalysis in order to pursue one or more other 'sub-schools' of Psychoanalysis -- ones that don't deny 'reality theory', ones that don't deny childhood sexual abuse, ones that quietly discard perhaps the most contentious theory in Psychoanalysis -- 'The Oedipal Complex' which Masson argued was being used to suppress the 'reality' of actual sexual assault memories, and instead being 're-interpreted' by Freud, particularly in a father and daughter case scenario, as his female client's 'own repressed sexual fantasy' relative to her dad -- which Freud viewed as being completely 'normal', a common fantasy amongst all young girls growing up with their respective dads.
That word 'repression' becomes a word impossible to argue -- a self-fulfilling prophecy for the theorist, in this case Freud. Allegedly, only a psychoanalyst has the 'knowledge and experience' to know what is 'repressed' and what is not, leaving everyone outside of Freud's 'Secret Society' in the dark, and in the lurch.
If Freud made two 'big' errors in the evolution of Classical Psychoanalytic Theory, the first 'big mistake' that he made -- before he even abandoned the 'reality-truamacy-seduction theory triad' -- was being 'obsessed' with the word 'repression' For Freud, particularly in his early days, Psychoanalysis was not Psychoanalysis unless it contained the central, linch-pin, idea of 'repression' -- the idea that just happened to make Psychoanalysis a 'Secret Society' with 'psychoanalysts in the 'we know' position and 'outsiders' in the 'they do not know' position...That's how 'pathological religious organizations work'...they are viewed from inside as being beyond criticism from 'outsiders' -- and that is what was taking Freud further and further away from the solid grounding of 'rational-empirical science' as Joseph Breuer was trying to hang onto -- while Freud was 'trying to fly to the moon and back'...
Even if Freud was moving towards 'fantasy theory' on at least partly legitimate clinical grounds, with a 'mixed bag of historical evidence' in this regard, I still share with Masson the basic belief, that regardless of what Freud's motives were at the time -- and some of them don't look very good at all -- Freud did indeed 'screw up' by abandoning his 'reality-traumacy-seduction theory triad' which, up to April 1896, provided the logical, rational-empirical grounding and theoretical foundation of Psychoanalysis.
Unlike Masson, I don't use this argument to say that 'all psychiatry and/or psychotherapy is bad', or that Psychoanalysis should go back to its pre-1897 reality-traumacy-seduction theory completely -- and reject any 'fantasy' theory created and written after 1896....I'm not even sure Masson would totally say this: he did just recently (2010) re-edit Freud's classic work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' (and did a good job of it in my opinion).
My theoretical position is that we need to go back -- or at least I need to go back in Psychoanalytic history, combine it with what I know today -- and sort out the respective roles that both 'reality' and 'fantasy' play in people's lives. 'Memories' are important -- and so too are 'fantasies'. What is there relationship to each other -- if any -- and how do they both have a crucial effect on man's individual health and/or 'neurotic and/or psychotic pathology'?
In this regard, we -- or at least 'I' again -- need to re-examine the relative 'health' or 'neurotic pathology' of Classical Psychoanalysis itself.
In regard to any theoretical 'errors' that Freud may have made, I need to go back and find out where these errors may have left -- indeed, did leave -- 'sick points' in Classical Psychoanalysis.
To use another metaphor, we might say that these 'theoretical weaknesses' that Freud left behind him, have left a hole in the side of The Great Ship, Classical Psychoanalysis, that has left it 'teetering' like the Titanic after it started to take in water left by the 'huge, sharp-edged iceberg'...Is Classical Psychoanalysis still floating? Or is it not? I will let you make your own interpretive conclusions regarding this matter -- as I continue to pursue my theoretical investigation, analysis, and 'creative, integrative, 'fix-up'.
I want to repair the ship; others -- including probably most psychoanalysts -- have probably already abandoned. No one wants to touch the 'Classic Psychoanalytic Ship-Titanic' -- at least now, perhaps because it is an historical artifact of history, and once it is changed it is no longer 'Classical' Psychoanalysis -- or admittedly, there are still some very 'anal-retentive diehards' who are still trying to make the old ship float...
Maybe I am being too hard here, maybe I am not but most people would probably now say that Classical Psychoanalysis is a 'relic' from the 'Victorian' era, and that there are other better models of Psychoanalysis that are creatively evolving in the 21st century --like Object Relations and Self-Psychology, and Lacanian Psychoanalyis, and Bionian Psychoanalysis...and 'Classical' Psychoanalysis -- with its concepts of 'The Oedipal Complex' and 'Castration Anxiety' and 'Penis Envy' -- belongs in a Psychoanalytic Museum. Anna Freud and Kurt Eissler would have certainly taken exception to this assertion but how many psychoanalysts are there left who still want to hang on with that 'obsessively fixated, anal-retentive, hanging on bite'....If they are still using a theory 'frozen by time', then they have probably become frozen themselves. I can certainly see Jeffrey Masson nodding his head in agreement from New Zealand -- even if it is me 'imagining' this from the man who called all of today's Psychoanalysis 'sterile'. (He was speaking in the early 80s and probably directing his complaint against 'Classical' Psychoanalysis with its potentially 'pathological' clinical usage of 'The Oedipal Complex, and perhaps its potential waste of time looking for deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper...and still deeper 'associations'...whether 'objective' or 'subjective', 'memories' or 'fantasies'...trust your psychoanalyst in all his or her professional wisdom to 're-interpret' them and/or 're-construct' them...until they are completely in line with 'Classic' Freudian Psychoanaytic Theory...even if this is the cart leading the horse rather than the horse leading the cart...)
Reality vs. fantasy -- we really have to clean up what we know to be the difference.
One is real -- and one is not. And Freud wanted to 'superimpose' the one onto the other. Well, sometimes, to be sure, they are superimposed onto each other....but then the question become: 'HOW'? To the point of a 'repressed sexual fantasy' completely underemining and fabricating an alleged 'sexual assault memory'? Maybe in a very extreme case....But do we really want to believe that this type of 'distortive cerebral activity' happens in all cases of little girls growing up in the same household as their father? A very 'convenient' defense for an 'actual father victimizer' over his much less powerful 'victim' daughter...Now I don't want to stereotype 'victimizers' and 'victims' because often we need to look at this whole problem of 'victimization' 'dialectically' such as in cases of 'domestic violence' where oftentimes men and women are both victims and victimizers in the same scernario leading to the escalation of a domestic conflict into domestic aggression and violence....But in Freud's 'moral challenge' case, we have to wonder whether Freud was indeed throwing a 'smoke and mirrors' theory over top of cases of 'real, cold-blooded, narcissistic reality' involving some fathers actually having sexually victimized their daughters...This would make 'The Oedipal Theory' at least a partly 'pathological' theory, if not more than that...Consequently, the silent abandonment of all or most critical thinking Psychoanalysts from the Sinking Classical Freudian Ship Titanic...and into other ''better floating' ships like The Object Relations Ship, The Self-Psychology Ship, The Bionian Ship, the Lacanian Ship, etc...
Or alternatively, the Good Classical Freudian Ship Titanic needs some very serious body work to patch some very large holes caused by a very large, sharp iceberg (The Oedipal Theory and Repression Theory and 'Penis Envy' Theory and 'Castration Anxiety Theory'.... Deconstructing or Self-Destructing under 80 years or more of very hard, critical, outside environmental pounding.....Every theory eventually crumbles under the weight of its own tombstone that it is carrying.....See Freud's Death Instinct...)
Sometimes -- to be sure -- our 'narcissistic biases and desires' can 'distort' the reality of our memories, but more than likely, this is usually done consciously, on purpose for narcissistic motives....Not 'unconsciously and repressively'! Or do we 'defer' to the 'Classical' Psychoanalysts and their self-fulfilling prophecy of 'repression' that can only be properly 'interpreted' by someone 'well-taught and well-trained' within their 'Secret Society'....(brainwashed, anyone?)
I love psychoanalysis -- and Freud -- 'projectively' like I love my father -- it/he just needs/needed to break through some seriously 'anal-retentive, narcissistic, righteous paradigms' that he couldn't see outside of...(kinda like my father...zap...ouch!...did I just say that?...perhaps that makes me a 'dictatorial control freak' as well...in my father's own image...only more of a 'deconstructive anarchist' -- and 'reconstructionist/re-builder' -- at the same time...You gotta love psychoanalysis for its ability to give you enlightening, sometimes harsh, personal insights....A lot of these insights may come with your better and better ability to interpret 'transference and sublimation projections'...more on this integrative concept later...)
Anyways, I am stubborn, and I want to 'fix' Classical Psychoanalysis; not pretend that it doesn't have a problem, or abandon it all together...
I want to freshly integrate 'Pre-Classical' and 'Classical' Psychoanalysis with 70 years of post-Classical psycho-theoretical and psychotherapeutic evolution...And yes, I guess that means that what I am creating here can no longer be right classified as 'Classical' Psychoanalysis...even though I hold onto more parts of it than many...
The name I used to call my 'post-Classical' rendition of Classical Psychoanalysis was 'DGB Psychoanalysis' -- as in 'Dialectic-Gap-Bridging' Psychoanlysis. Now I have changed the name to 'Quantum-Dialectic' Psychoanalysis, the idea being that when we creatively engage in a 'democratic-dialectic-gap-bridging' approach to problem-solving and conflict-resolving where 'dominant/suppressive/oppressive masters' and 'suppressed/dissociated/oppressed slaves' -- regardless of whether we are talking about opposing people or opposing ideas and/or theories and/or paradigms -- are taken out of the master/slave paradigm and inserted into a 'dialectically-democratically-dynamically egalitarian paradigm-process', then 'good things can happen in the relationship -- very good things -- and this can result in a 'quantum leap' in the 'quality of our lives'...
Masterr/slave relationships almost always carry an element of either overt and/or covert hostility, aggression, rebellion, anarchy....power and/or revenge seeking...as well as dissociative alienation....the stuff that bad relationships are made out of...They are the seeds of Narcissistic Capitalism and/or visa versa....and in effect, these polar, pathological psycho-dynamics are no different then the same type of variables that also can be connected to Mao Tse Tung, Lenin, Stalin -- and probably even Karl Marx in his later years as he became more of an anarchist than a democrat....
Marx did much to describe the plight of the alienated worker, the master/slave relationship as first formulated by Hegel, and its extrapolated connection to the relationship of aristocrat to the working class proletariat, employer to employee, upper to lower class, the widening gap of power and control and money, the 'growing abyss' between the classes, greed and narcissism, covert collusion and manipulation, a lack of tranparency and accountability amongst those who control the 'money vault' -- whether private or public -- a lack of equality and integrity and respect...This whole network of pathological factors are just as relevant -- if not more relevant -- today, then they were back in Marx's time...and to repeat, I believe that Marx became less humanistic and more radically aggressive later in his writing career. His early work remains probably his best work in terms of its 'humanistic-existential value'...which Erich Fromm picked up and ran with...
What we are talking about here -- the difference between the authoritarian personality and the democratic personality, and between the authoritarian relationship and the democratic relationship -- goes right back to the main core of our psycho-dynamic relationship with our parents which is then 'introjected' or 'internalized' into our personality....and we end up having to live with for our entire lives...
If we have had an authoritarian, dictatorial, and or aggressively autocratic parent -- either father or mother -- then it is quite likely that we are going to be struggling with 'power and authority' issues, our whole lives....either as a 'dictator' ourselves, and/or as a person 'submitting to' and/or 'rebelling against' all 'projected dictators'' in our social environment...
Indeed, it can be easily argued that one of, if not the, most important 'core nuclear conflicts' in our personality is going to be the issue of 'control and power' vs. 'giving up or letting go of control and power'....
Offshoots of this 'internal and external power-control conflict' include the conflict between 'competition and co-operation', between 'unity and separation', between 'approach and avoidance', between 'seduction and abandonment', between 'love and power', between narcissism and altruism, between leadership and being led....
And somewhere in this list lies the conflict between 'cold-hearted reality' and 'narcissistic fantasy'....or stated differently...'objective reality' and 'subjective fantasy'....with the reality being that 'subjective narcissistic fantasy' is often going to 'sugar coat' and/or completely replace 'cold-hearted, narcissistic reality'...
Take, for example, a childhood sexual assault....committed by a father against his daughter....a case of 'cold-hearted, narcissistic reality'.....And now we have a relatively young 'radical' doctor who specializes in the treatment of 'hysteria' and he is trying to assert that 'all cases of hysteria are caused by childhood sexual assaults and/or manipulations/seductions of the (usually female) victim, with the victimizer usually being the father, an uncle, a 'friend' of the family, an older brother, or a stranger...
How are the 'good Victorian doctors of Vienna' going to react to such a radical theory and theorist? Suppress him!....Oppress him! Ostrasize him! Exclude him! Dissociate him until he 'comes around' with a 'new theory' that the 'good doctors' could live better with -- one that doesn't 'trumpet' the co-connection between childhood sexual assault and adult hysteria....and which could get some of the 'good doctors' into trouble...politically, legally, and/or professionally...
Was their world really much different than ours today?
We see -- or don't see -- this type of 'Covert, Manipulative, Leverage, Power-Dynamic' going on all the time in private corporations, in the government, in the media...all around us...every day we do or don't go to work...'Power and Dominance vs. Less Power and Suppression, Dissociation, Ostrazization, Opression, Alienation...'...
And so too we see -- or don't see -- this same type of power-dynamics at work in our own personality....
But a funny thing happened on the way to the forum...
Where there is power and dominance vs. less power and suppression....
The Suppressed and Ostracized Will Usually Come Back to Haunt Us...See Anaximander...600 and something B.C...
Call this 'The Return of The Suppressed or Ostracized or Dissociated'....
.............................................................................................................
Whence things have their origin,
Thence also their destruction happens,
According to necessity;
For they give to each other justice and recompense
For their injustice
In conformity with the ordinance of Time.
..................................................................................
Kinda sounds like Freud's 'Death Instinct' -- i.e., all things returning from whence they came (whether that be 'the earth' (Freud and Freud's mother), or 'The Apeiron' -- or 'Chaos' (Anaximander) or possibly 'The Abyss' (Nietzsche)...
It also sounds like Freud's 'Return of The Repressed' which I have re-worded up above....which alternatively can be viewed as a form of 'Cosmic Justice' and 'Cosmic Retribution'...the idea that 'The More Powerful' and 'The Less Powerful' will continually chase each other through Time -- one 'de-volving' and 'losing power' while the other 'evolves' and 'gains more power' until the less powerful becomes more powerful and the more powerful becomes less powerful, the 'two dialectic, opposing and conflicting polarities' switching with each other over time as they both race through time...'taking turns' in the 'light of sunshine' and the 'darkness of the shadows' in life, in death, and being re-born again....'
..........................................................................................
How different is this to the 'magical trick' that Freud's mother showed her 'astonished' young boy who was just starting to 'formulate his philosophy of life and death'....to reappear some 58 years later in his 1920 'Beyond The Pleasure Principle'...
'Another memory was of his mother assuring him at the age of six that were made of earth and therefore must return to earth. When he expressed his doubts of this unwelcome statement she rubbed her hands together and showed him the dark fragments of epidermis that came there as a speciment of the earth we are made of. His astonisment was unbounded and for the first time he captured some sense of the inevitable. As he put it: "I slowly acquiesced in the idea I was later to hear expressed in the words 'Thou owest nature a death.'
.................................................................................
-- dgb, June 9th, 2011, some modifications and updates November 26th, 2011, Jan. 17th, 2012....
-- David Gordon Bain
Under revision....Jan. 17th, Jan. 21st, 2012...
...........................................................................
What I would like to do in this essay is to compare and contrast the work of Freud in 1894 (The Neuro-Psychoses of Defense), 1895 (Studies in Hysteria), and 1896 (The Aetiology of Hysteria) with the work of Freud in 1920 (Beyond The Pleasure Principle) and 1923 (The Ego and The Id).
Of particular speculative interest -- and this 'speculation' falls under the category of 'would have', 'could have', 'should have' -- is the question of what might have happened to Psychoanalysis if Freud had written The Ego and The Id in say, 1895 or 1896 rather than in 1923?
Now, obviously, Freud's mindset and abstraction process had not evolved enough in the mid 1890s when he was just getting going with what is usually classified as his 'Pre-Classical' Psychoanalytic thinking to have written The Ego and The Id at such an early date.
But what the question does is to direct us to look at how Freud's 1923 conceptuology of 'the ego', 'the id', and 'the superego' would have mixed -- or not mixed -- with his 'pre-Classcial, reality-traumacy-seduction-repression theory'.
You see, me being the 'post-Hegelian, dialectic, integrative bi-polarity thinker' that I am, I look at the question of 'What would have 'Classical' Psychoanalysis have looked like if Freud had integrated all 46 years of his pre-psychoanalytic and psychoanalytic thinking (1903-1939), rather than throwing the first four years of his work into a 'Dissociation Pit' -- like the 'neurotics' and 'neuroses' he was describing in his clients.
And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. Friedrich Nietzsche
These early, pre-1897, classic Psychoanalytic works listed above need to be reconciled, integrated, and harmonized with his later work -- not treated like Psychoanalsysis suddenly developed its own 'neurotic disorder' with Freud 'repressing' -- or in a better choice of words, 'dissociating' -- the first four professional years of his career. (I dislike the Freudian concept of 'repression' because of its reductionistic and non-empirical nature; my own preferable terminology consists of words like: 'alienating', 'dissociating', 'suppressing', 'restraining', 'splitting', 'avoiding'...trying as much as possible to stay away from the concept of repression except in discussing the way that Freud used this term...for the most part reductionistically and non-empirically...and not in the best interests of Psychoanalysis in my opinion.)
Remember, this is the man -- Freud -- who burned many of his most personal letters from Fliess, and presumably, important others. Indeed, he would have most certainly done the same if he had ever gotten a hold of his own letters to Fliess, but history was smiling on historians in this latter case, not on Freud, and thus, we get a truer picture -- not a 'mythological' one -- of what was happeneing during the crucial early development years of Psychoanalysis.
Freud had a very strong wish to keep most of his private life -- strictly private. But all of his most intimate letters to Fliess have made it through World War ll, and into the history books for philosophers, psycho-theorists and psychoanalytic historians like myself to interpret and evaluate as they choose to.
Masson was the 'golden child' of psychoanalysis at the beginning of the early 1980s who was given the 'key to the vault' to publish all of Freud's very intimate letters to Fliess (before then, the ones that seemed to tarnish Freud's reputation in any way were screened out of publication), but when Masson got into these letters, didn't like what he saw -- and said so -- accusing Freud of 'losing moral courage' around the issue of real childhood memories, specifically, real childhood sexual assault or 'seduction' memories, the main 'protectors' of The Freudian legacy -- mainly his daughter, Anna Freud, and the highly esteemed senior Freudian loyalist, Kurt Eissler -- were obviously berating themselves for letting Masson into The Freudian Archives in the first place because of the disastrous public relations scandal that followed -- Masson, more specifically, accusing Freud of 'backing away' and 'hiding' from the very 'professionally and politically unpopular' subject of childhood sexual abuse after a very volatile, confrontational meeting of The Vienna Psychiatry and Neurology Society on April 21st, 1896, in which Freud read his very famous or infamous paper, depending on your perspective, 'The Aetiology of Hysteria', which connected childhood sexual assault to the overall 'cause' of hysteria. Krafft-Ebing, the leader of the evening meeting called Freud's paper a 'scientific fairy tale'.
I have followed Masson's path through Freud's complete letters to Fliess through 1895 and 1896 in particular, and some of them don't shine a good light on Freud -- particularly the Emma Ekstein medical atrocity, and arguably, Freud's abandonment of his pre-1897 combined 'reality-traumacy-seduction' theory -- especially, IF this 'theory abandonment' reflected a loss of moral courage on Freud's part to stand up to his medical peers and superiors. Granted, they may have had -- indeed, most certainly did have -- 'leverage' over both his professional reputation and his income level relative to 'referring' or 'not referring' patients to him....and Freud had a growing family that he needed to shelter, feed, and clothe -- a type of situation where most of us may have at one point or another in our professional career been told to 'keep something quiet' or risk the consequences...or alternatively, you just know that saying something may not be a good idea relative to keeping your job and/or your career...
Still, regardless, the reputation of both Freud and Psychoanalysis is significantly at stake here. The nuts and bolts of the situation comes down to this moral question: Did Freud turn his back on his clients, particularly his female clients, and betray them -- like Judas? Or did Freud radically change the theory of Psychoanalysis 180 degrees because he believed that this was 'the right' thing to do based on a 're-interpretation of his clinical evidence'?
It is two very complicated, connected questions with both Freud's and Psychoanalysis' reputation and integrity hanging in the balance. It certainly seems like most Psychoanalysts back in the 1980s 'rejected and wrote Masson off as an academic radical' (at least in public, anyway). The position of professional and academic 'non-psychoanalysts' is less clear.
It comes down to whether you believe or not that Freud's whole change in direction of Psychoanalysis from 'reality theory' to 'fantasy theory' was, in effect, a 'cover-up' of chldhood sexual abuse -- or not. The evidence is still not fully clear, and probably never will be. There is evidence to suggest that Freud was in the process of 'changing' his reality theory to fantasy theory as early as December, 1895, which would make the evening of April 21st, 1896 far less dramatically significant.
Freud's creation and writing of 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was also coming hard about this time, and may have also influenced his changeover from reality theory to fantasy theory. There was the Emma Ekstein medical mishap of February, 1895 that was still 'playing in Freud's head -- as 'guilt' -- and from this guilt, may have sprung his concept (or Fliess') of 'longing'....Freud started to call Emma a 'hysterical bleeder' -- a patient who 'bled' because she 'longed' to be back in the presence of her 'male therapist' (presumably Freud), and she 'bled' to 'get his attention'....
That interpretation does not look very good on Freud at all as this was a woman who almost bled to death because Fliess, when he was doing 'the nasal-sexual surgery' (whatever that supposed connection was about) that he shouldn't even have been doing -- left about a foot of medical gauze or more in her nasal cavity, forgot about it, went back from Vienna to Berlin, and it was almost a month later when another doctor, examining Emma's badly infected nasal passage, suddenly found and pulled on the gauze -- and a torrent of blood rushed out after the gauze had been pulled out....And a year later Freud was calling Emma a 'hysterical bleeder'...
All of this is to say that there was 'mixed evidence' as to 'why Freud did what he did' when he started to abandon 'reality theory' for 'fantasy theory'....and some of the evidence isn't good...
Without The Psychoanalytic Establishment ever admitting that Freud may have -- or actually did -- 'screw up' bigtime -- still, it would seem that most Psychoanalysts have quietly left the school of Classical Psychoanalysis in order to pursue one or more other 'sub-schools' of Psychoanalysis -- ones that don't deny 'reality theory', ones that don't deny childhood sexual abuse, ones that quietly discard perhaps the most contentious theory in Psychoanalysis -- 'The Oedipal Complex' which Masson argued was being used to suppress the 'reality' of actual sexual assault memories, and instead being 're-interpreted' by Freud, particularly in a father and daughter case scenario, as his female client's 'own repressed sexual fantasy' relative to her dad -- which Freud viewed as being completely 'normal', a common fantasy amongst all young girls growing up with their respective dads.
That word 'repression' becomes a word impossible to argue -- a self-fulfilling prophecy for the theorist, in this case Freud. Allegedly, only a psychoanalyst has the 'knowledge and experience' to know what is 'repressed' and what is not, leaving everyone outside of Freud's 'Secret Society' in the dark, and in the lurch.
If Freud made two 'big' errors in the evolution of Classical Psychoanalytic Theory, the first 'big mistake' that he made -- before he even abandoned the 'reality-truamacy-seduction theory triad' -- was being 'obsessed' with the word 'repression' For Freud, particularly in his early days, Psychoanalysis was not Psychoanalysis unless it contained the central, linch-pin, idea of 'repression' -- the idea that just happened to make Psychoanalysis a 'Secret Society' with 'psychoanalysts in the 'we know' position and 'outsiders' in the 'they do not know' position...That's how 'pathological religious organizations work'...they are viewed from inside as being beyond criticism from 'outsiders' -- and that is what was taking Freud further and further away from the solid grounding of 'rational-empirical science' as Joseph Breuer was trying to hang onto -- while Freud was 'trying to fly to the moon and back'...
Even if Freud was moving towards 'fantasy theory' on at least partly legitimate clinical grounds, with a 'mixed bag of historical evidence' in this regard, I still share with Masson the basic belief, that regardless of what Freud's motives were at the time -- and some of them don't look very good at all -- Freud did indeed 'screw up' by abandoning his 'reality-traumacy-seduction theory triad' which, up to April 1896, provided the logical, rational-empirical grounding and theoretical foundation of Psychoanalysis.
Unlike Masson, I don't use this argument to say that 'all psychiatry and/or psychotherapy is bad', or that Psychoanalysis should go back to its pre-1897 reality-traumacy-seduction theory completely -- and reject any 'fantasy' theory created and written after 1896....I'm not even sure Masson would totally say this: he did just recently (2010) re-edit Freud's classic work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' (and did a good job of it in my opinion).
My theoretical position is that we need to go back -- or at least I need to go back in Psychoanalytic history, combine it with what I know today -- and sort out the respective roles that both 'reality' and 'fantasy' play in people's lives. 'Memories' are important -- and so too are 'fantasies'. What is there relationship to each other -- if any -- and how do they both have a crucial effect on man's individual health and/or 'neurotic and/or psychotic pathology'?
In this regard, we -- or at least 'I' again -- need to re-examine the relative 'health' or 'neurotic pathology' of Classical Psychoanalysis itself.
In regard to any theoretical 'errors' that Freud may have made, I need to go back and find out where these errors may have left -- indeed, did leave -- 'sick points' in Classical Psychoanalysis.
To use another metaphor, we might say that these 'theoretical weaknesses' that Freud left behind him, have left a hole in the side of The Great Ship, Classical Psychoanalysis, that has left it 'teetering' like the Titanic after it started to take in water left by the 'huge, sharp-edged iceberg'...Is Classical Psychoanalysis still floating? Or is it not? I will let you make your own interpretive conclusions regarding this matter -- as I continue to pursue my theoretical investigation, analysis, and 'creative, integrative, 'fix-up'.
I want to repair the ship; others -- including probably most psychoanalysts -- have probably already abandoned. No one wants to touch the 'Classic Psychoanalytic Ship-Titanic' -- at least now, perhaps because it is an historical artifact of history, and once it is changed it is no longer 'Classical' Psychoanalysis -- or admittedly, there are still some very 'anal-retentive diehards' who are still trying to make the old ship float...
Maybe I am being too hard here, maybe I am not but most people would probably now say that Classical Psychoanalysis is a 'relic' from the 'Victorian' era, and that there are other better models of Psychoanalysis that are creatively evolving in the 21st century --like Object Relations and Self-Psychology, and Lacanian Psychoanalyis, and Bionian Psychoanalysis...and 'Classical' Psychoanalysis -- with its concepts of 'The Oedipal Complex' and 'Castration Anxiety' and 'Penis Envy' -- belongs in a Psychoanalytic Museum. Anna Freud and Kurt Eissler would have certainly taken exception to this assertion but how many psychoanalysts are there left who still want to hang on with that 'obsessively fixated, anal-retentive, hanging on bite'....If they are still using a theory 'frozen by time', then they have probably become frozen themselves. I can certainly see Jeffrey Masson nodding his head in agreement from New Zealand -- even if it is me 'imagining' this from the man who called all of today's Psychoanalysis 'sterile'. (He was speaking in the early 80s and probably directing his complaint against 'Classical' Psychoanalysis with its potentially 'pathological' clinical usage of 'The Oedipal Complex, and perhaps its potential waste of time looking for deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper...and still deeper 'associations'...whether 'objective' or 'subjective', 'memories' or 'fantasies'...trust your psychoanalyst in all his or her professional wisdom to 're-interpret' them and/or 're-construct' them...until they are completely in line with 'Classic' Freudian Psychoanaytic Theory...even if this is the cart leading the horse rather than the horse leading the cart...)
Reality vs. fantasy -- we really have to clean up what we know to be the difference.
One is real -- and one is not. And Freud wanted to 'superimpose' the one onto the other. Well, sometimes, to be sure, they are superimposed onto each other....but then the question become: 'HOW'? To the point of a 'repressed sexual fantasy' completely underemining and fabricating an alleged 'sexual assault memory'? Maybe in a very extreme case....But do we really want to believe that this type of 'distortive cerebral activity' happens in all cases of little girls growing up in the same household as their father? A very 'convenient' defense for an 'actual father victimizer' over his much less powerful 'victim' daughter...Now I don't want to stereotype 'victimizers' and 'victims' because often we need to look at this whole problem of 'victimization' 'dialectically' such as in cases of 'domestic violence' where oftentimes men and women are both victims and victimizers in the same scernario leading to the escalation of a domestic conflict into domestic aggression and violence....But in Freud's 'moral challenge' case, we have to wonder whether Freud was indeed throwing a 'smoke and mirrors' theory over top of cases of 'real, cold-blooded, narcissistic reality' involving some fathers actually having sexually victimized their daughters...This would make 'The Oedipal Theory' at least a partly 'pathological' theory, if not more than that...Consequently, the silent abandonment of all or most critical thinking Psychoanalysts from the Sinking Classical Freudian Ship Titanic...and into other ''better floating' ships like The Object Relations Ship, The Self-Psychology Ship, The Bionian Ship, the Lacanian Ship, etc...
Or alternatively, the Good Classical Freudian Ship Titanic needs some very serious body work to patch some very large holes caused by a very large, sharp iceberg (The Oedipal Theory and Repression Theory and 'Penis Envy' Theory and 'Castration Anxiety Theory'.... Deconstructing or Self-Destructing under 80 years or more of very hard, critical, outside environmental pounding.....Every theory eventually crumbles under the weight of its own tombstone that it is carrying.....See Freud's Death Instinct...)
Sometimes -- to be sure -- our 'narcissistic biases and desires' can 'distort' the reality of our memories, but more than likely, this is usually done consciously, on purpose for narcissistic motives....Not 'unconsciously and repressively'! Or do we 'defer' to the 'Classical' Psychoanalysts and their self-fulfilling prophecy of 'repression' that can only be properly 'interpreted' by someone 'well-taught and well-trained' within their 'Secret Society'....(brainwashed, anyone?)
I love psychoanalysis -- and Freud -- 'projectively' like I love my father -- it/he just needs/needed to break through some seriously 'anal-retentive, narcissistic, righteous paradigms' that he couldn't see outside of...(kinda like my father...zap...ouch!...did I just say that?...perhaps that makes me a 'dictatorial control freak' as well...in my father's own image...only more of a 'deconstructive anarchist' -- and 'reconstructionist/re-builder' -- at the same time...You gotta love psychoanalysis for its ability to give you enlightening, sometimes harsh, personal insights....A lot of these insights may come with your better and better ability to interpret 'transference and sublimation projections'...more on this integrative concept later...)
Anyways, I am stubborn, and I want to 'fix' Classical Psychoanalysis; not pretend that it doesn't have a problem, or abandon it all together...
I want to freshly integrate 'Pre-Classical' and 'Classical' Psychoanalysis with 70 years of post-Classical psycho-theoretical and psychotherapeutic evolution...And yes, I guess that means that what I am creating here can no longer be right classified as 'Classical' Psychoanalysis...even though I hold onto more parts of it than many...
The name I used to call my 'post-Classical' rendition of Classical Psychoanalysis was 'DGB Psychoanalysis' -- as in 'Dialectic-Gap-Bridging' Psychoanlysis. Now I have changed the name to 'Quantum-Dialectic' Psychoanalysis, the idea being that when we creatively engage in a 'democratic-dialectic-gap-bridging' approach to problem-solving and conflict-resolving where 'dominant/suppressive/oppressive masters' and 'suppressed/dissociated/oppressed slaves' -- regardless of whether we are talking about opposing people or opposing ideas and/or theories and/or paradigms -- are taken out of the master/slave paradigm and inserted into a 'dialectically-democratically-dynamically egalitarian paradigm-process', then 'good things can happen in the relationship -- very good things -- and this can result in a 'quantum leap' in the 'quality of our lives'...
Masterr/slave relationships almost always carry an element of either overt and/or covert hostility, aggression, rebellion, anarchy....power and/or revenge seeking...as well as dissociative alienation....the stuff that bad relationships are made out of...They are the seeds of Narcissistic Capitalism and/or visa versa....and in effect, these polar, pathological psycho-dynamics are no different then the same type of variables that also can be connected to Mao Tse Tung, Lenin, Stalin -- and probably even Karl Marx in his later years as he became more of an anarchist than a democrat....
Marx did much to describe the plight of the alienated worker, the master/slave relationship as first formulated by Hegel, and its extrapolated connection to the relationship of aristocrat to the working class proletariat, employer to employee, upper to lower class, the widening gap of power and control and money, the 'growing abyss' between the classes, greed and narcissism, covert collusion and manipulation, a lack of tranparency and accountability amongst those who control the 'money vault' -- whether private or public -- a lack of equality and integrity and respect...This whole network of pathological factors are just as relevant -- if not more relevant -- today, then they were back in Marx's time...and to repeat, I believe that Marx became less humanistic and more radically aggressive later in his writing career. His early work remains probably his best work in terms of its 'humanistic-existential value'...which Erich Fromm picked up and ran with...
What we are talking about here -- the difference between the authoritarian personality and the democratic personality, and between the authoritarian relationship and the democratic relationship -- goes right back to the main core of our psycho-dynamic relationship with our parents which is then 'introjected' or 'internalized' into our personality....and we end up having to live with for our entire lives...
If we have had an authoritarian, dictatorial, and or aggressively autocratic parent -- either father or mother -- then it is quite likely that we are going to be struggling with 'power and authority' issues, our whole lives....either as a 'dictator' ourselves, and/or as a person 'submitting to' and/or 'rebelling against' all 'projected dictators'' in our social environment...
Indeed, it can be easily argued that one of, if not the, most important 'core nuclear conflicts' in our personality is going to be the issue of 'control and power' vs. 'giving up or letting go of control and power'....
Offshoots of this 'internal and external power-control conflict' include the conflict between 'competition and co-operation', between 'unity and separation', between 'approach and avoidance', between 'seduction and abandonment', between 'love and power', between narcissism and altruism, between leadership and being led....
And somewhere in this list lies the conflict between 'cold-hearted reality' and 'narcissistic fantasy'....or stated differently...'objective reality' and 'subjective fantasy'....with the reality being that 'subjective narcissistic fantasy' is often going to 'sugar coat' and/or completely replace 'cold-hearted, narcissistic reality'...
Take, for example, a childhood sexual assault....committed by a father against his daughter....a case of 'cold-hearted, narcissistic reality'.....And now we have a relatively young 'radical' doctor who specializes in the treatment of 'hysteria' and he is trying to assert that 'all cases of hysteria are caused by childhood sexual assaults and/or manipulations/seductions of the (usually female) victim, with the victimizer usually being the father, an uncle, a 'friend' of the family, an older brother, or a stranger...
How are the 'good Victorian doctors of Vienna' going to react to such a radical theory and theorist? Suppress him!....Oppress him! Ostrasize him! Exclude him! Dissociate him until he 'comes around' with a 'new theory' that the 'good doctors' could live better with -- one that doesn't 'trumpet' the co-connection between childhood sexual assault and adult hysteria....and which could get some of the 'good doctors' into trouble...politically, legally, and/or professionally...
Was their world really much different than ours today?
We see -- or don't see -- this type of 'Covert, Manipulative, Leverage, Power-Dynamic' going on all the time in private corporations, in the government, in the media...all around us...every day we do or don't go to work...'Power and Dominance vs. Less Power and Suppression, Dissociation, Ostrazization, Opression, Alienation...'...
And so too we see -- or don't see -- this same type of power-dynamics at work in our own personality....
But a funny thing happened on the way to the forum...
Where there is power and dominance vs. less power and suppression....
The Suppressed and Ostracized Will Usually Come Back to Haunt Us...See Anaximander...600 and something B.C...
Call this 'The Return of The Suppressed or Ostracized or Dissociated'....
.............................................................................................................
Whence things have their origin,
Thence also their destruction happens,
According to necessity;
For they give to each other justice and recompense
For their injustice
In conformity with the ordinance of Time.
..................................................................................
Kinda sounds like Freud's 'Death Instinct' -- i.e., all things returning from whence they came (whether that be 'the earth' (Freud and Freud's mother), or 'The Apeiron' -- or 'Chaos' (Anaximander) or possibly 'The Abyss' (Nietzsche)...
It also sounds like Freud's 'Return of The Repressed' which I have re-worded up above....which alternatively can be viewed as a form of 'Cosmic Justice' and 'Cosmic Retribution'...the idea that 'The More Powerful' and 'The Less Powerful' will continually chase each other through Time -- one 'de-volving' and 'losing power' while the other 'evolves' and 'gains more power' until the less powerful becomes more powerful and the more powerful becomes less powerful, the 'two dialectic, opposing and conflicting polarities' switching with each other over time as they both race through time...'taking turns' in the 'light of sunshine' and the 'darkness of the shadows' in life, in death, and being re-born again....'
..........................................................................................
How different is this to the 'magical trick' that Freud's mother showed her 'astonished' young boy who was just starting to 'formulate his philosophy of life and death'....to reappear some 58 years later in his 1920 'Beyond The Pleasure Principle'...
'Another memory was of his mother assuring him at the age of six that were made of earth and therefore must return to earth. When he expressed his doubts of this unwelcome statement she rubbed her hands together and showed him the dark fragments of epidermis that came there as a speciment of the earth we are made of. His astonisment was unbounded and for the first time he captured some sense of the inevitable. As he put it: "I slowly acquiesced in the idea I was later to hear expressed in the words 'Thou owest nature a death.'
.................................................................................
-- dgb, June 9th, 2011, some modifications and updates November 26th, 2011, Jan. 17th, 2012....
-- David Gordon Bain
The Newest Edition of The DGB (Multi-Bi-Polar) Model of The Human Psyche (After My Brief Appearance at The Toronto Institute of Psychoanalysis For A Scientific Seminar on Sat. May 12, 2012)
The Newest Edition of The DGB Model of The Human Psyche
Sunday, January 8, 2012
1.14. On The Distinction Between 'Screen Memories', 'Lifestyle Memories' -- and 'Transference Memories'
In process, January 15th, 2012...Finished January 21st, 2012....
1. Introduction
What Freud called 'screen memories' from 1899 onwards (Freud, Screen Memories, 1899), Adler, in the 1920s, called 'lifestyle memories', and I, in 2012 (going back to the mid 1980s), call 'transference memories'.
Each name-concept mentioned above involves an assumptive paradigm shift that changes conceptual and theoretical boundaries, and opens up new conceptual and theoretical territory. If the paradigm shift turns out to be theoretically and therapeutically/pragmatically useful, then I say 'go with the paradigm shift' and/or at least open up your mind to the idea of 'bouncing back and forth' between different paradigm assumptions. That's called being open-minded. And/or 'thinking both inside and outside the box.' And/or 'not letting traditional, status-quo, Establishment ideas define and limit you to the prospect and potential for an 'evolutionary advancement in new and better labels, ideas, theories, classification systems, paradigms...'.
In particular, when you open yourself up to the use of 'bi-polarity theories' that reflect a similar 'bi-polarity in life', you advance yourself past the point of being caught up in an Aristolean 'either/or' classification system and/or a Kierkegaardian choice between Theory A vs. Theory B, or political party A vs. B...each focusing on the particular advantages of their end of the bi-polar idea spectrum while downplaying, minimizing, degrading the polar theory of their opposite competitor. Until, one day, someone has the bright idea of integrating the two opposite polar paradigm theories, and very neatly incorporates the best advantages of each, while covering up for the weaknesses of each...
This is what Hegel meant when he said -- and I am paraphrasing -- that 'every (one-sided) idea or theory carries the seeds of its own self-destruction.
In physics, the key to overcoming the deficiences of both the 'particle theory' and the 'wave theory' of matter and energy lay in 'dialectically integrating' the two theories together, and such is what needs to be done with Freud's pre-1897 'reality-traumacy-seduction' theory vs. his post 1896 'fantasy-instinct-impulse' theory, or worded differently, his 'childhood sexual abuse' theory vs. his 'childhood sexual instinct, impulse and fantasy' theory....
Life is continually busting down man-made conceptual and theoretical boundaries...
We either adjust, accept, appreciate, and respect this fact -- or we don't.
Those who persist on righteously and narcissistically holding on -- with a pit bull's bite -- to one-sided, anal-retentive theories that defy and distort life, are holding us all back from 'evolving' to a more Hegelian multi-dialectic-dynamic approach and paradigm of: philosophy, history, psychology, law, politics, economics, biology, physics, chemistry, business, economics, art, music, religion, mythology, spirituality...
Nietzsche's 'healthiest' philosophy book was his first one: 'The Birth of Tragedy' which subscribed to a 'bi-polar' theory that involved integrating his classification system of an 'Apollonian' and 'Dionysian' lifestyle.
However, after that book, Nietzsche shunned Apollo to 'The Dissociation Pit' -- and even though Nietzsche continued to write an ongoing assortment of brilliant essays/books afterwards, still, they were partly 'de-evolving' into an increasingly one-sided 'Dionysian approach' to life which, in my editorial opinion, will usually end in 'Dionysian-Id self-destruction' if not properly 'balanced' by 'Apollonian, Enlightenment-Ego-and-Superego' characteristics....as trumpeted in Nietzsche's first book....
Whether coincidence or not, the last ten years of Nietzsche's life ended in his own 'existential self-destruction' -- perhaps from falling 'too deeply in love' one too many times (i.e., in the last case, to Lou Andreas Salome) without having the internal 'Apollonian resources' to pull him out of his own self-created 'Romantic Abyss'...Was 'romance' a part of Nietzsche's 'Dionysian Classification System' -- or was Dionysus more fixated on alcohol, seduction, sex, music, and sensual hedonism...
Perhaps Nietzsche forgot about 'Eros' or 'Cupid', as I have too, for the most part, in my larger 'mythological' personality classification system. Regardless, it's good to be 'romantic'...but not to the point of 'romantic self-destruction'....and maybe Nietzsche fell just a little too hard on his last attempt at romance in his life....
2. Screen Memories, Lifestyle Memories, and Transference Memories
a. A 'screen memory' suggests for us to 'look for another deeper, more etiologically (causally) significant memory...because this one you are looking at here is 'a screen memory that is both hiding and alluding to a deeper, repressed memory';
b. A 'lifestyle memory' says 'look right here -- don't go any further -- you have found the diagnostic gold right here' (with an underlying 'Adlerian unity -- as in no conflict -- in the personality' assumptive foundation);
c. A 'transference memory' says 'look here -- you've found the diagnostic gold and don't need to look any further' (but with an operative, Freudian assumptive foundation of 'conflict -- as opposed to unity -- in the personality, or even better, the dialectic idea of 'conflicted unity' or 'unified conflict' in the personality -- which integrates both Freudian and Adlerian assumptive foundations.
Thus, we arrive at the DGB Multi-Bi-Polarity or Quantum-Dialectic assumptive foundation of 'conficted unity' or 'unified conflict' in the personality, with different degrees of conflict and/or unity going on at different times in the personality, depending on the context of one's present and past life-situation interacting with each other at different moments in time.
Now, in 'Remembering, Repeating, and Working Through' (1914), Freud, although he was using the concept of 'screen memory' (as in 'dig deeper for a more important, 'repressed' memory), still stated quite assertively that that there was essential, diagnostic information to be obtained from a screen memory (so much so, in my editorial opinion that this type of memory rightly deserves to be called a 'transference memory' rather than, or in addition to, being called a Freudian 'screen memory'.
..................................................................................
In the words of Freud:
In some cases, I have had an impression that the familiar childhood amnesia, which is theoretically so important to us, is completely counterbalanced by screen memories. Not only some but all of what is essential from childhood has been retained in these memories. It is simply a question of knowing how to extract it out of them by analysis. They represent the forgotten years of childhood as adequately as the manifest content of a dream represents the dream-thoughts. (Freud, Remembering, Repeating, and Working-Through', Edited by James Strachey in collaboration with Anna Freud, assisted by Alix Strachey and Alan Tyson, S.E. Vol. Xll, p. 148.)
......................................................................................................
Freud, as early as 1895, claimed that 'hysterical (read also: neurotic) symptoms were overdetermined' (Freud, Studies on Hysteria, V. 2, p. 263 and 290, and in 1896 (The Aetiology of Hysteria), Freud asserted that memories are like a 'geneological tree' (1896, p. 198), that they are 'associatively connected' to each other (1896, p. 198), 'co-operated' with each other (1896, p. 202), and, in this regard, were structurally and psycho-dynamically similar to each other...Freud said that both the memories and the symptoms could be put together like a 'child's picture puzzle' (1896, p. 205), and that, 'the contents of the infantile scenes (the 'lowest common denominator' of all the 'memory links and associations' of which at this point in Freud's theorizing were considered both 'real' and 'unconscious/repressed' -- soon to change after 1896, in fact, maybe even partly changing in the midst of this essay, my editorial addition) turn out to be indispensible supplements to the associative and logical framework of the neurosis, whose insertion makes its course of development for the first time evident, or even, as we might often say, self-evident' (1896, p. 205).
You can see this 'co-operation of memories' illustrated in some of Freud's collection of conscious early memories between the ages of 3 and 7, the general time period that I am talking about when I use the term 'conscious early memories', and which Freud includes under the category of 'screen memories'.
Adler didn't follow Freud into his 'repression' or 'childhood amnesia' assumption, and instead, used 'conscious early memories' which he also called 'lifestyle memories' as one of his main diagnostic, psychological interpretive tools. I have followed Adler's lead in this regard -- Adler learned from Freud, and I learned indirectly from Adler (i.e., through 'The Adler Institute of Ontario' back in the early 1980s) , but neither Adler nor I were/are impressed with Freud's general theory of 'repression/childhood amnesia', and have, more or less, eliminated this type of thinking from our respective theoretical perspectives. In my case, not entirely as illustrated by my own two case examples of the 'reports' cited below which can be viewed as belonging to my own childhood 'sea of amnesia'.
There are however, what Adler called 'reports' (of events as recited usually by family members) that may or may not be personally remembered. And these can cause some 'mental confusion' as we may become confused as to whether we actually remember these (usually early childhood) events, or whether we don't. I have two reports of this type in my life: 1. an event where I stood up in a Church Congregation at about 4 or 5 years old and naming all the countries in the world that my dad pointed to on a globe (I couldn't come close to that now.) 2. an event where my dad said I reported another child stealing from a storeowner, and the storeowner thanking my dad for raising such an 'honest' child. (That was in my 'naive, innocent, unjaded early days before I learned how the Narcissistic Capitalist world works. Now I focus on politicians 'stealing' from taxpayers, and corporate owners 'stealing' from their employees...perhaps as partly 'learned' in that first store experience that I don't remember....)
'Reports' are kind of 'nebulous, skaky transference diagnostic tools' -- not entirely meaningless, but not as trusted as a 'vivid conscious childhood memory' which is likely to have much stronger diagnostic, 'transference structural and psycho-dynamic memory, fantasy, and obsessive impulse and repetition associations' attached to it.
Freud had more than a handful of conscious early transference memories which he did and he didn't put much stock into. If you keep hammering the importance of 'repressed early childhood memories', how many theorists/therapists trained in your school of psychology and psychotherapy are going to take a serious look at the 'lifesyle or transference significance' of conscious early memories. Adler did -- and he called them 'lifestyle memories'. I do, and I bring these 'lifestyle memories' back into a Freudian and post-Freudian 'conflict model/paradigm' of the personality, and interpret/analyze them from my own post-Freudian, post-Adlerian 'paradoxical, dialectic, multi-bi-polar, perspective.
Two of the more important conscious early transference memories in Freud's life were: 1. his 'primal master bedroom scene' memory relative to his busting in on his parents when he was 3 or 4 years old while they were having sex, and being yelled at by his father to get out of the room immediately (I have interpreted this memory in a number of other different essays such as 'The First True Case of Psychoanalysis'); and 2. his 'magician memory' where his mom told little Siggy that we all are born from the earth and will return to the earth, and to demonstrate this, she rubbed her hands and produced some dark specimens of epidermis to a first skeptical, then astonished, but believing, little Siggy. Sounds like Freud's early childhood assumptive basis for what would much later in his life become 'the principle of constancy', 'the conservation of energy', 'the law of entropy', and from 'Beyond The Pleasure Principle' -- 'the nirvana' and 'death instinct' principle. Not to mention Freud's 'narcissistic, transference fixation' with always looking for a 'magician' in his life (Breuer, Charcot, Bernheim, Fliess, Jung...) as well as 'astonishing' the world by metaphorically being one himself.
We will leave this subject of 'childhood transference memory interpreting' for now, as I want to go back over my still evolving DGB model of the Psyche/Personality. There are a few modifications and changes that I would like to add. We will do this in my next essay. And my model of the psyche needs to be connected to my theory of 'transference memories' and their psycholoigical interpretation....
Join me there!
-- dgb, January 21st, 2012,
-- David Gordon Bain
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations...
-- Are Still in Process....
1. Introduction
What Freud called 'screen memories' from 1899 onwards (Freud, Screen Memories, 1899), Adler, in the 1920s, called 'lifestyle memories', and I, in 2012 (going back to the mid 1980s), call 'transference memories'.
Each name-concept mentioned above involves an assumptive paradigm shift that changes conceptual and theoretical boundaries, and opens up new conceptual and theoretical territory. If the paradigm shift turns out to be theoretically and therapeutically/pragmatically useful, then I say 'go with the paradigm shift' and/or at least open up your mind to the idea of 'bouncing back and forth' between different paradigm assumptions. That's called being open-minded. And/or 'thinking both inside and outside the box.' And/or 'not letting traditional, status-quo, Establishment ideas define and limit you to the prospect and potential for an 'evolutionary advancement in new and better labels, ideas, theories, classification systems, paradigms...'.
In particular, when you open yourself up to the use of 'bi-polarity theories' that reflect a similar 'bi-polarity in life', you advance yourself past the point of being caught up in an Aristolean 'either/or' classification system and/or a Kierkegaardian choice between Theory A vs. Theory B, or political party A vs. B...each focusing on the particular advantages of their end of the bi-polar idea spectrum while downplaying, minimizing, degrading the polar theory of their opposite competitor. Until, one day, someone has the bright idea of integrating the two opposite polar paradigm theories, and very neatly incorporates the best advantages of each, while covering up for the weaknesses of each...
This is what Hegel meant when he said -- and I am paraphrasing -- that 'every (one-sided) idea or theory carries the seeds of its own self-destruction.
In physics, the key to overcoming the deficiences of both the 'particle theory' and the 'wave theory' of matter and energy lay in 'dialectically integrating' the two theories together, and such is what needs to be done with Freud's pre-1897 'reality-traumacy-seduction' theory vs. his post 1896 'fantasy-instinct-impulse' theory, or worded differently, his 'childhood sexual abuse' theory vs. his 'childhood sexual instinct, impulse and fantasy' theory....
Life is continually busting down man-made conceptual and theoretical boundaries...
We either adjust, accept, appreciate, and respect this fact -- or we don't.
Those who persist on righteously and narcissistically holding on -- with a pit bull's bite -- to one-sided, anal-retentive theories that defy and distort life, are holding us all back from 'evolving' to a more Hegelian multi-dialectic-dynamic approach and paradigm of: philosophy, history, psychology, law, politics, economics, biology, physics, chemistry, business, economics, art, music, religion, mythology, spirituality...
Nietzsche's 'healthiest' philosophy book was his first one: 'The Birth of Tragedy' which subscribed to a 'bi-polar' theory that involved integrating his classification system of an 'Apollonian' and 'Dionysian' lifestyle.
However, after that book, Nietzsche shunned Apollo to 'The Dissociation Pit' -- and even though Nietzsche continued to write an ongoing assortment of brilliant essays/books afterwards, still, they were partly 'de-evolving' into an increasingly one-sided 'Dionysian approach' to life which, in my editorial opinion, will usually end in 'Dionysian-Id self-destruction' if not properly 'balanced' by 'Apollonian, Enlightenment-Ego-and-Superego' characteristics....as trumpeted in Nietzsche's first book....
Whether coincidence or not, the last ten years of Nietzsche's life ended in his own 'existential self-destruction' -- perhaps from falling 'too deeply in love' one too many times (i.e., in the last case, to Lou Andreas Salome) without having the internal 'Apollonian resources' to pull him out of his own self-created 'Romantic Abyss'...Was 'romance' a part of Nietzsche's 'Dionysian Classification System' -- or was Dionysus more fixated on alcohol, seduction, sex, music, and sensual hedonism...
Perhaps Nietzsche forgot about 'Eros' or 'Cupid', as I have too, for the most part, in my larger 'mythological' personality classification system. Regardless, it's good to be 'romantic'...but not to the point of 'romantic self-destruction'....and maybe Nietzsche fell just a little too hard on his last attempt at romance in his life....
2. Screen Memories, Lifestyle Memories, and Transference Memories
a. A 'screen memory' suggests for us to 'look for another deeper, more etiologically (causally) significant memory...because this one you are looking at here is 'a screen memory that is both hiding and alluding to a deeper, repressed memory';
b. A 'lifestyle memory' says 'look right here -- don't go any further -- you have found the diagnostic gold right here' (with an underlying 'Adlerian unity -- as in no conflict -- in the personality' assumptive foundation);
c. A 'transference memory' says 'look here -- you've found the diagnostic gold and don't need to look any further' (but with an operative, Freudian assumptive foundation of 'conflict -- as opposed to unity -- in the personality, or even better, the dialectic idea of 'conflicted unity' or 'unified conflict' in the personality -- which integrates both Freudian and Adlerian assumptive foundations.
Thus, we arrive at the DGB Multi-Bi-Polarity or Quantum-Dialectic assumptive foundation of 'conficted unity' or 'unified conflict' in the personality, with different degrees of conflict and/or unity going on at different times in the personality, depending on the context of one's present and past life-situation interacting with each other at different moments in time.
Now, in 'Remembering, Repeating, and Working Through' (1914), Freud, although he was using the concept of 'screen memory' (as in 'dig deeper for a more important, 'repressed' memory), still stated quite assertively that that there was essential, diagnostic information to be obtained from a screen memory (so much so, in my editorial opinion that this type of memory rightly deserves to be called a 'transference memory' rather than, or in addition to, being called a Freudian 'screen memory'.
..................................................................................
In the words of Freud:
In some cases, I have had an impression that the familiar childhood amnesia, which is theoretically so important to us, is completely counterbalanced by screen memories. Not only some but all of what is essential from childhood has been retained in these memories. It is simply a question of knowing how to extract it out of them by analysis. They represent the forgotten years of childhood as adequately as the manifest content of a dream represents the dream-thoughts. (Freud, Remembering, Repeating, and Working-Through', Edited by James Strachey in collaboration with Anna Freud, assisted by Alix Strachey and Alan Tyson, S.E. Vol. Xll, p. 148.)
......................................................................................................
Freud, as early as 1895, claimed that 'hysterical (read also: neurotic) symptoms were overdetermined' (Freud, Studies on Hysteria, V. 2, p. 263 and 290, and in 1896 (The Aetiology of Hysteria), Freud asserted that memories are like a 'geneological tree' (1896, p. 198), that they are 'associatively connected' to each other (1896, p. 198), 'co-operated' with each other (1896, p. 202), and, in this regard, were structurally and psycho-dynamically similar to each other...Freud said that both the memories and the symptoms could be put together like a 'child's picture puzzle' (1896, p. 205), and that, 'the contents of the infantile scenes (the 'lowest common denominator' of all the 'memory links and associations' of which at this point in Freud's theorizing were considered both 'real' and 'unconscious/repressed' -- soon to change after 1896, in fact, maybe even partly changing in the midst of this essay, my editorial addition) turn out to be indispensible supplements to the associative and logical framework of the neurosis, whose insertion makes its course of development for the first time evident, or even, as we might often say, self-evident' (1896, p. 205).
You can see this 'co-operation of memories' illustrated in some of Freud's collection of conscious early memories between the ages of 3 and 7, the general time period that I am talking about when I use the term 'conscious early memories', and which Freud includes under the category of 'screen memories'.
Adler didn't follow Freud into his 'repression' or 'childhood amnesia' assumption, and instead, used 'conscious early memories' which he also called 'lifestyle memories' as one of his main diagnostic, psychological interpretive tools. I have followed Adler's lead in this regard -- Adler learned from Freud, and I learned indirectly from Adler (i.e., through 'The Adler Institute of Ontario' back in the early 1980s) , but neither Adler nor I were/are impressed with Freud's general theory of 'repression/childhood amnesia', and have, more or less, eliminated this type of thinking from our respective theoretical perspectives. In my case, not entirely as illustrated by my own two case examples of the 'reports' cited below which can be viewed as belonging to my own childhood 'sea of amnesia'.
There are however, what Adler called 'reports' (of events as recited usually by family members) that may or may not be personally remembered. And these can cause some 'mental confusion' as we may become confused as to whether we actually remember these (usually early childhood) events, or whether we don't. I have two reports of this type in my life: 1. an event where I stood up in a Church Congregation at about 4 or 5 years old and naming all the countries in the world that my dad pointed to on a globe (I couldn't come close to that now.) 2. an event where my dad said I reported another child stealing from a storeowner, and the storeowner thanking my dad for raising such an 'honest' child. (That was in my 'naive, innocent, unjaded early days before I learned how the Narcissistic Capitalist world works. Now I focus on politicians 'stealing' from taxpayers, and corporate owners 'stealing' from their employees...perhaps as partly 'learned' in that first store experience that I don't remember....)
'Reports' are kind of 'nebulous, skaky transference diagnostic tools' -- not entirely meaningless, but not as trusted as a 'vivid conscious childhood memory' which is likely to have much stronger diagnostic, 'transference structural and psycho-dynamic memory, fantasy, and obsessive impulse and repetition associations' attached to it.
Freud had more than a handful of conscious early transference memories which he did and he didn't put much stock into. If you keep hammering the importance of 'repressed early childhood memories', how many theorists/therapists trained in your school of psychology and psychotherapy are going to take a serious look at the 'lifesyle or transference significance' of conscious early memories. Adler did -- and he called them 'lifestyle memories'. I do, and I bring these 'lifestyle memories' back into a Freudian and post-Freudian 'conflict model/paradigm' of the personality, and interpret/analyze them from my own post-Freudian, post-Adlerian 'paradoxical, dialectic, multi-bi-polar, perspective.
Two of the more important conscious early transference memories in Freud's life were: 1. his 'primal master bedroom scene' memory relative to his busting in on his parents when he was 3 or 4 years old while they were having sex, and being yelled at by his father to get out of the room immediately (I have interpreted this memory in a number of other different essays such as 'The First True Case of Psychoanalysis'); and 2. his 'magician memory' where his mom told little Siggy that we all are born from the earth and will return to the earth, and to demonstrate this, she rubbed her hands and produced some dark specimens of epidermis to a first skeptical, then astonished, but believing, little Siggy. Sounds like Freud's early childhood assumptive basis for what would much later in his life become 'the principle of constancy', 'the conservation of energy', 'the law of entropy', and from 'Beyond The Pleasure Principle' -- 'the nirvana' and 'death instinct' principle. Not to mention Freud's 'narcissistic, transference fixation' with always looking for a 'magician' in his life (Breuer, Charcot, Bernheim, Fliess, Jung...) as well as 'astonishing' the world by metaphorically being one himself.
We will leave this subject of 'childhood transference memory interpreting' for now, as I want to go back over my still evolving DGB model of the Psyche/Personality. There are a few modifications and changes that I would like to add. We will do this in my next essay. And my model of the psyche needs to be connected to my theory of 'transference memories' and their psycholoigical interpretation....
Join me there!
-- dgb, January 21st, 2012,
-- David Gordon Bain
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations...
-- Are Still in Process....
1.13. Bridging The Gap Between Pre-Psychoanalytic 'Reality-Traumacy' Theory and Classical Psychoanalytic 'Fantasy-Impulse' Theory
New essay....in process....January 14th/2012....
A distinction between three types of choices can be made:
1. An 'Aristotlean Either/Or Classification Choice';
Eg. Is a tomato a fruit or a vegetable?
2. A 'Kierkegaardian Either/Or Existential Choice';
Eg. Should I get married, or should I not?
3. A 'Hegelian Dialectic-Integrative Choice';
Eg. The Democrats and Republicans compromising on some legislative bill in order to get it passed into law....
A Hegelian choice involves synthesizing two or more seemingly opposing choices -- a 'compromise-solution' of sorts but ideally with the 'best of both worlds integrated into one 'dialectically interactive but cohesive unit or paradigm'....
Is integrating pre-1897 'Traumacy-Seduction Theory with post 1896 'Fantasy-Impulse Theory' going to give us a superior form of Psychoanalysis than either 'Pre-Classical' Psychoanalysis or 'Classical' Psychoanalysis' taken separately? That is the dialectically posed question here....
A distinction between three types of choices can be made:
1. An 'Aristotlean Either/Or Classification Choice';
Eg. Is a tomato a fruit or a vegetable?
2. A 'Kierkegaardian Either/Or Existential Choice';
Eg. Should I get married, or should I not?
3. A 'Hegelian Dialectic-Integrative Choice';
Eg. The Democrats and Republicans compromising on some legislative bill in order to get it passed into law....
A Hegelian choice involves synthesizing two or more seemingly opposing choices -- a 'compromise-solution' of sorts but ideally with the 'best of both worlds integrated into one 'dialectically interactive but cohesive unit or paradigm'....
Is integrating pre-1897 'Traumacy-Seduction Theory with post 1896 'Fantasy-Impulse Theory' going to give us a superior form of Psychoanalysis than either 'Pre-Classical' Psychoanalysis or 'Classical' Psychoanalysis' taken separately? That is the dialectically posed question here....
1.12. On The Similarity Between 'The Mind-Psyche-Self's' Immune System and The Mind-Body's Immune System
The 'mind's defense system' and the 'body's defense system' work essentially the same way -- and for that matter, so does our 'computer's defense system'. And for that matter, so does our 'legal-civil defense system', and our 'military defense system'.
All of them can be said to use 'vaults' or 'prisons' to 'lock up the bad guys' -- or the 'viruses' and 'bacteria' -- or the 'dangerous thoughts, impulses, drives, obsessions, fantasies, and/or potential actions'....
In our 'psychic immune system', we all have ' superego and ego-defenders' who are like 'soldiers' or 'prison guards' who watch to make sure the 'prisoners don't escape' from 'The Shadow-Id Vault' -- the 'vault comprised of locked-up, misbehaving thoughts, impulses, drives, obsessions, fantasies, and/or potential actions'.
Now, introduce an 'existential or immediacy stressor' -- say, a loss of job, loss of income, loss of spouse, insufficient income to meet all our bills, and/or a huge bill unexpectedly landing on our desk -- say a lawyer's bill, a vet's bill, a dentist's bill, a doctor's bill, a tax bill... -- without the funds to take care of it...
Immediacy stressors can lead to 'upsets' or 'imbalances' in the mind-body's immune system, spawned by loss of hope, loss of spirit, loss of optimism, 'deflation of the ego'....Sometimes -- oftentimes -- this type of stess can spawn 'compensatory impulses' of either an angry, vengeful... and/or the sensual, pleasure-seeking variety...Indeed, often 'hard internal and/or external stressors' can trigger the onset of a whole host of possible 'addictions' -- food, sex, alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc...These are what I call 'oral obsessions' or 'oral addictions' -- they all involve the act of 'consuming' or 'receiving' pleasure -- or, at least, this is their intent.
So you wander down to your favorite 'watering hole' -- knock down a couple of 'quick cocktails', your 'ego defenders/prison guards' start to get a little 'tipsey' on the job while they are supposed to be 'working' -- and 'the inmates of your asylum, your Shadow-Id Vault' start to get a little excited that the guards 'are losing control of themselves and the 'door to the vault' -- and this is when you start to get 'The SIEVE Effect' -- Shadow-Id-Ego-Vault-Energy starting to 'escape' the vault and head upwards in the psyche, up towards the control system of 'The Central Ego'...Now, if your 'prsison guards' start to get really drunk, you could get a complete 'evacuation' of The Shadow-Id Vault -- and a 'flooding upwards' of the 'free inmates from your asylum', until you get, in effect, what might be metaphorically viewed as a 'Storming of The Bastille'...at which point you become a much more 'unpredictable patron of your local watering hole'...your behavior reflecting perhaps, more and more of the 'contents' of your 'Shadow-Id Vault and/or Ego', or worded otherwise, your 'Narcissistic-Dionysian Ego' as opposed to your 'Apollonian Ego' which used to be much more in control before you sucked down three cocktails...
If 'food' is your 'compensatory impulse of choice', then you are likely going to put on weight unless you exercise a lot, have a fast metabolism, and/or 'throw it back up again'...
If 'drug addiction' is your compensatory impulse of choice, then it will depend on whether you prefer the 'social and/or sexual type' or the 'anti-social, anal-schizoid, oral fantasy' type...The first type are usually done in couples or groups and/or parties; the latter type is more often done in metaphorical 'bat caves' where you disappear for 6 or 12 or 24 hours at a time before 're-surfacing again'..Alcohol can also serve this type of 'loner' addiction...
'Gambling' of course is likely only going to make your money problem worse...Then there are the people with lots of money -- who don't have a problem with money -- until gambling creates a money problem where there was none before...
This analysis is rather short, sharp, and pointed as well as all 'metaphorical' but I think the message is still important. The mind and body function similarly -- and dialectically -- not detached, different, and apart....
Enough said on this subject for now...This can be viewed, more or less, as an extension or extrapolation of 'Classic Freudian Theory'...
-- dgb, Jan. 8th, 2012...
-- David Gordon Bain
All of them can be said to use 'vaults' or 'prisons' to 'lock up the bad guys' -- or the 'viruses' and 'bacteria' -- or the 'dangerous thoughts, impulses, drives, obsessions, fantasies, and/or potential actions'....
In our 'psychic immune system', we all have ' superego and ego-defenders' who are like 'soldiers' or 'prison guards' who watch to make sure the 'prisoners don't escape' from 'The Shadow-Id Vault' -- the 'vault comprised of locked-up, misbehaving thoughts, impulses, drives, obsessions, fantasies, and/or potential actions'.
Now, introduce an 'existential or immediacy stressor' -- say, a loss of job, loss of income, loss of spouse, insufficient income to meet all our bills, and/or a huge bill unexpectedly landing on our desk -- say a lawyer's bill, a vet's bill, a dentist's bill, a doctor's bill, a tax bill... -- without the funds to take care of it...
Immediacy stressors can lead to 'upsets' or 'imbalances' in the mind-body's immune system, spawned by loss of hope, loss of spirit, loss of optimism, 'deflation of the ego'....Sometimes -- oftentimes -- this type of stess can spawn 'compensatory impulses' of either an angry, vengeful... and/or the sensual, pleasure-seeking variety...Indeed, often 'hard internal and/or external stressors' can trigger the onset of a whole host of possible 'addictions' -- food, sex, alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc...These are what I call 'oral obsessions' or 'oral addictions' -- they all involve the act of 'consuming' or 'receiving' pleasure -- or, at least, this is their intent.
So you wander down to your favorite 'watering hole' -- knock down a couple of 'quick cocktails', your 'ego defenders/prison guards' start to get a little 'tipsey' on the job while they are supposed to be 'working' -- and 'the inmates of your asylum, your Shadow-Id Vault' start to get a little excited that the guards 'are losing control of themselves and the 'door to the vault' -- and this is when you start to get 'The SIEVE Effect' -- Shadow-Id-Ego-Vault-Energy starting to 'escape' the vault and head upwards in the psyche, up towards the control system of 'The Central Ego'...Now, if your 'prsison guards' start to get really drunk, you could get a complete 'evacuation' of The Shadow-Id Vault -- and a 'flooding upwards' of the 'free inmates from your asylum', until you get, in effect, what might be metaphorically viewed as a 'Storming of The Bastille'...at which point you become a much more 'unpredictable patron of your local watering hole'...your behavior reflecting perhaps, more and more of the 'contents' of your 'Shadow-Id Vault and/or Ego', or worded otherwise, your 'Narcissistic-Dionysian Ego' as opposed to your 'Apollonian Ego' which used to be much more in control before you sucked down three cocktails...
If 'food' is your 'compensatory impulse of choice', then you are likely going to put on weight unless you exercise a lot, have a fast metabolism, and/or 'throw it back up again'...
If 'drug addiction' is your compensatory impulse of choice, then it will depend on whether you prefer the 'social and/or sexual type' or the 'anti-social, anal-schizoid, oral fantasy' type...The first type are usually done in couples or groups and/or parties; the latter type is more often done in metaphorical 'bat caves' where you disappear for 6 or 12 or 24 hours at a time before 're-surfacing again'..Alcohol can also serve this type of 'loner' addiction...
'Gambling' of course is likely only going to make your money problem worse...Then there are the people with lots of money -- who don't have a problem with money -- until gambling creates a money problem where there was none before...
This analysis is rather short, sharp, and pointed as well as all 'metaphorical' but I think the message is still important. The mind and body function similarly -- and dialectically -- not detached, different, and apart....
Enough said on this subject for now...This can be viewed, more or less, as an extension or extrapolation of 'Classic Freudian Theory'...
-- dgb, Jan. 8th, 2012...
-- David Gordon Bain
Saturday, January 7, 2012
1.11. On The Seeming Absurdity of The Often Brutal Dialectic Interplay Between 'Being and Nothingness', and Within 'The Master-Slave Relationship'
Finished...Jan. 7th, 2012
I go to bed most nights feeling more and more like Doestevsky, or at least some character in a Doestevsky novel -- like 'Crime and Punishment', 'The Idiot', or 'Notes From The Underground'. It is the first time in my life that I have seriously felt like this. Call it a product of 'The Trial' or 'The Stranger' -- getting older, feeling it, and not being where you want to be.
Or call it 'PMS-C Disorder' if you will -- 'Pessimism, Misery and Miserable Attitude, Skepticism -- Cynicism'.
Hegel's Hotel is built on a combination of love, reason, passion, idealism -- and the personal experience of elements of its opposite polarity -- moral, social and personal, democratic rage and outrage, as well as a sense of 'powerlessness', ineffectualness', self and social alienation, on top of a 'socio-economic meltdown' -- and behind all of this, a lack of sufficient and necessary 'will to self-empowerment'. Except what I can muster up in Hegel's Hotel here...
You don't usually write 5,000 or 10,000 pages of philosophy, psychology, economics, law, business, and/or politics without something seriously gnawing at you from 'The Shadow of Your Spirit and Soul...
Sometimes, what may 'sieve out' of your Shadow-Id-Ego-Vault-Energy' (SIEVE) through its 'transference-sublimation' into your work, at other times can rush or flood out, like The Mississippi or Red River during the springtime. You could call this a 'Shadow Rush' or a 'Shadow Flood' which may take many forms of 'High Psycho-Drama' -- a 'rage rush', a 'grief rush', a 'panic rush', a 'nervous breakdown', a 'psychotic meltdown'... We could be talking about anything from a Nietzsche 'love meltdown' -- at least that is how I heard it interpreted recently -- to a Ted Bundy murder spree....
.................................................................................................................
Lou Andreas-Salomé (born Louise von Salomé or Luíza Gustavovna Salomé, Russian: Луиза Густавовна Саломе; 12 February 1861 – 5 January 1937) was a Russian-born psychoanalyst and author. Her diverse intellectual interests led to friendships with a broad array of distinguished western luminaries, including Nietzsche, Wagner, Freud, and Rilke.
.............................................................................................................................
Category: Works
0 comments
I just finished watching the film When Nietzsche Wept (based on the book of the same title). It’s an interesting story that mixes some historical figures and events with Nietzschean philosophy and Freudian psychology. Although the movie has its flaws, it’s worth watching if you’re interested in any of these topics.
Revealing the story won’t ruin the experience, so here is a synopsis. Nietzsche suffers migraines and is depressed and suicidal due to a broken heart. The girl that broke his heart asks Dr. Josef Breuer (Freud’s mentor) to help him recover using both medicine and his new “talk therapy.” She has no romantic interest in Nietzsche, but she cares for him and believes that he will produce something great for mankind in the future.
The relationship between Breuer and Nietzsche proves mutually beneficial. Breuer helps Nietzsche recover, and Nietzsche helps Breuer overcome his own demons. They become friends in the end, and Nietzsche finally recognizes and confides his greatest fear to Breuer: he doesn’t want to die alone. And Nietzsche wept.
For all his complex ideas about ethics, social order, and the Ubermensch, at the most basic level, Nietzsche is simply a lonely guy. Of course, this is a gross oversimplification, but this idea is useful nonetheless. Philosophers come in all flavors, but they are plagued by the same occupational hazards, loneliness/alienation being the most common.
This got me thinking about the terrible toll loneliness takes on many visionary creators, whether they are thinkers, artists, or writers. They care about the world, yet they often express it in terms that people do not or cannot understand or appreciate. Their social ineptness or aloofness makes them difficult to love, and their insecurities make it difficult for them to accept love. Loneliness drives some to self-destruct, sometimes taking others with them, yet many simply vanish like shadows. Rare are those that weathered the storm and live long enough to receive acknowledgment within their lifetimes.
If only this were not true. Think of how many careers were cut short prematurely? How much richer would humanity be if these people had made their contributions, both great and small? Would a more stable Nietzsche be less brilliant, or would his thoughts be more balanced and accessible? Sadly, we will never know the answers to any of these questions.
Surely all creators want to live to see their work recognized; if only they would do more to help themselves. Or is this asking too much? Perhaps what drives creation invariably inhibits healthy social interaction as well; it is both a blessing and a curse. I don’t know. But I do know that everyone can use a friend at some point, even the father of the Ubermensch......................................................................................................................................
Life is a strange integrative -- and non-integrative -- mix of co-operation and competition.
Narcissistic Capitalism often exasperates the 'competition' end of things -- as well as 'dissociating' the 'harmonious co-operation' end of things....
Power and money often distorts, perverts, poisons the truth -- and yet makes it real anyway -- creating a 'smoke and mirrors' show, an 'ideological and/or marketing fascade' where we really don't know who to trust, or what to trust, because the people we want to trust, want our money or our time and labour -- more than they want our friendship, our well-being, and our goodwill. Thus, narcissistic capitalism breeds a very lonely, alienated, 'Lord of The Flies', world....making it all the more important to hang on tight to our family, friends, and loved ones...Because once you lose your family, friends, loved ones -- what do you have left? -- a very, isolated, lonely, alienated existence -- and sometimes a 'moral rage and outrage' against the type of 'Narcissistic Corporate and Government Environment' that created such an isolated, lonely, alienated world we live in....with people not really caring about each other's problems -- we have enough of our own -- and going into the 'marketplace' each day to often 'rob and plunder' each other, to greater and lesser extents...
In this context, we try to find something meaningful in life....maybe we can find something meaningful in our work, and/or we 'cringe and defend ourselves' through each day, in order to get home to find something meaningful with our family, friends, loved ones, at night...And/or when that goes, what do you have left? A spiritless soul?
Or perhaps a 'spiritless soul' in a 'spiritless environment' -- still striving for a 'spiritual soul and a spiritual existence'....a dangerous, conflicted, ambivalent existence....and a dangerous 'abyss crossing' from a largely meaningless and spiritless existence to a more 'meaningful and spirited one' where we can perhaps feel more like a 'Superman' or 'Superwoman' with an effectual 'Will to Power and Self-Empowerment'...
And then maybe we have our Schopenhaurean, or Doestevskean, or Kierkegaardean'
moments when we shake our personal heads at the 'absurdity' of it all -- this often rather brutal dialectic interplay between 'Being and Nothingness'...
.......................................................................................
Last Thoughts on Woodie Guthrie
-- Bob Dylan
.........................................................................................
I find my spirit in 'Hegel's Hotel'....
Freud found his spirit in 'Psychoanalysis'....
How did Freud 'lose his spirit' -- before he 're-found it' -- in Psychoanalysis?
Stay tuned for Part 2 of this essay...soon to come...
-- dgb, Jan. 7th, 2012,
-- David Gordon Bain
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations....
-- Are Still in Process....
I go to bed most nights feeling more and more like Doestevsky, or at least some character in a Doestevsky novel -- like 'Crime and Punishment', 'The Idiot', or 'Notes From The Underground'. It is the first time in my life that I have seriously felt like this. Call it a product of 'The Trial' or 'The Stranger' -- getting older, feeling it, and not being where you want to be.
Or call it 'PMS-C Disorder' if you will -- 'Pessimism, Misery and Miserable Attitude, Skepticism -- Cynicism'.
Hegel's Hotel is built on a combination of love, reason, passion, idealism -- and the personal experience of elements of its opposite polarity -- moral, social and personal, democratic rage and outrage, as well as a sense of 'powerlessness', ineffectualness', self and social alienation, on top of a 'socio-economic meltdown' -- and behind all of this, a lack of sufficient and necessary 'will to self-empowerment'. Except what I can muster up in Hegel's Hotel here...
You don't usually write 5,000 or 10,000 pages of philosophy, psychology, economics, law, business, and/or politics without something seriously gnawing at you from 'The Shadow of Your Spirit and Soul...
Sometimes, what may 'sieve out' of your Shadow-Id-Ego-Vault-Energy' (SIEVE) through its 'transference-sublimation' into your work, at other times can rush or flood out, like The Mississippi or Red River during the springtime. You could call this a 'Shadow Rush' or a 'Shadow Flood' which may take many forms of 'High Psycho-Drama' -- a 'rage rush', a 'grief rush', a 'panic rush', a 'nervous breakdown', a 'psychotic meltdown'... We could be talking about anything from a Nietzsche 'love meltdown' -- at least that is how I heard it interpreted recently -- to a Ted Bundy murder spree....
.................................................................................................................
Lou Andreas-Salomé (born Louise von Salomé or Luíza Gustavovna Salomé, Russian: Луиза Густавовна Саломе; 12 February 1861 – 5 January 1937) was a Russian-born psychoanalyst and author. Her diverse intellectual interests led to friendships with a broad array of distinguished western luminaries, including Nietzsche, Wagner, Freud, and Rilke.
.............................................................................................................................
When Nietzsche Wept
By: Justarius on Apr 17 2009Category: Works
0 comments
I just finished watching the film When Nietzsche Wept (based on the book of the same title). It’s an interesting story that mixes some historical figures and events with Nietzschean philosophy and Freudian psychology. Although the movie has its flaws, it’s worth watching if you’re interested in any of these topics.
Revealing the story won’t ruin the experience, so here is a synopsis. Nietzsche suffers migraines and is depressed and suicidal due to a broken heart. The girl that broke his heart asks Dr. Josef Breuer (Freud’s mentor) to help him recover using both medicine and his new “talk therapy.” She has no romantic interest in Nietzsche, but she cares for him and believes that he will produce something great for mankind in the future.
The relationship between Breuer and Nietzsche proves mutually beneficial. Breuer helps Nietzsche recover, and Nietzsche helps Breuer overcome his own demons. They become friends in the end, and Nietzsche finally recognizes and confides his greatest fear to Breuer: he doesn’t want to die alone. And Nietzsche wept.
For all his complex ideas about ethics, social order, and the Ubermensch, at the most basic level, Nietzsche is simply a lonely guy. Of course, this is a gross oversimplification, but this idea is useful nonetheless. Philosophers come in all flavors, but they are plagued by the same occupational hazards, loneliness/alienation being the most common.
This got me thinking about the terrible toll loneliness takes on many visionary creators, whether they are thinkers, artists, or writers. They care about the world, yet they often express it in terms that people do not or cannot understand or appreciate. Their social ineptness or aloofness makes them difficult to love, and their insecurities make it difficult for them to accept love. Loneliness drives some to self-destruct, sometimes taking others with them, yet many simply vanish like shadows. Rare are those that weathered the storm and live long enough to receive acknowledgment within their lifetimes.
If only this were not true. Think of how many careers were cut short prematurely? How much richer would humanity be if these people had made their contributions, both great and small? Would a more stable Nietzsche be less brilliant, or would his thoughts be more balanced and accessible? Sadly, we will never know the answers to any of these questions.
Surely all creators want to live to see their work recognized; if only they would do more to help themselves. Or is this asking too much? Perhaps what drives creation invariably inhibits healthy social interaction as well; it is both a blessing and a curse. I don’t know. But I do know that everyone can use a friend at some point, even the father of the Ubermensch.
Life is a strange integrative -- and non-integrative -- mix of co-operation and competition.
Narcissistic Capitalism often exasperates the 'competition' end of things -- as well as 'dissociating' the 'harmonious co-operation' end of things....
Power and money often distorts, perverts, poisons the truth -- and yet makes it real anyway -- creating a 'smoke and mirrors' show, an 'ideological and/or marketing fascade' where we really don't know who to trust, or what to trust, because the people we want to trust, want our money or our time and labour -- more than they want our friendship, our well-being, and our goodwill. Thus, narcissistic capitalism breeds a very lonely, alienated, 'Lord of The Flies', world....making it all the more important to hang on tight to our family, friends, and loved ones...Because once you lose your family, friends, loved ones -- what do you have left? -- a very, isolated, lonely, alienated existence -- and sometimes a 'moral rage and outrage' against the type of 'Narcissistic Corporate and Government Environment' that created such an isolated, lonely, alienated world we live in....with people not really caring about each other's problems -- we have enough of our own -- and going into the 'marketplace' each day to often 'rob and plunder' each other, to greater and lesser extents...
In this context, we try to find something meaningful in life....maybe we can find something meaningful in our work, and/or we 'cringe and defend ourselves' through each day, in order to get home to find something meaningful with our family, friends, loved ones, at night...And/or when that goes, what do you have left? A spiritless soul?
Or perhaps a 'spiritless soul' in a 'spiritless environment' -- still striving for a 'spiritual soul and a spiritual existence'....a dangerous, conflicted, ambivalent existence....and a dangerous 'abyss crossing' from a largely meaningless and spiritless existence to a more 'meaningful and spirited one' where we can perhaps feel more like a 'Superman' or 'Superwoman' with an effectual 'Will to Power and Self-Empowerment'...
And then maybe we have our Schopenhaurean, or Doestevskean, or Kierkegaardean'
moments when we shake our personal heads at the 'absurdity' of it all -- this often rather brutal dialectic interplay between 'Being and Nothingness'...
.......................................................................................
Last Thoughts on Woodie Guthrie
- Songwriters: Bob Dylan
When your head gets twisted and your mind grows numb
When you think you're too old, too young, too smart or too dumb
When you're laggin' behind and losin' your pace
In a slow motion crawl of life's busy race
No matter what you're doing, if you start givin' up
If the wine don't come to the top of your cup
If the winds got you sideways with, with one hand holdin' on
And the other starts slippin' and the feelin' is gone
And your train engine fire needs a new spark to catch it
And the woods' easy findin' but you're lazy to fetch it
And your sidewalk starts curlin' and the street gets too long
And you start walkin' backwards though you know it's wrong
And lonesome comes up as down goes the day
And tomorrow's mornin' seems so far away
And you feel the reins from your pony are slippin'
And your rope is a slidin' 'cause your hands are a drippin'
And your sun-decked desert and evergreen valleys
Turn to broken down slums and trash-can alleys
And your sky cries water and your drain pipes a pourin'
And the lightnin's a flashin' and the thunders a crashin'
And the windows are rattlin' and breakin'
And the roof tops a shakin'
And your whole world's a slammin' and bangin'
And your minutes of sun turn to hours of storm
And to yourself, you sometimes say
"I never knew it was gonna be this way
Why didn't they tell me the day I was born?"
And you start gettin' chills and you're jumpin' from sweat
And you're lookin' for somethin' you ain't quite found yet
And you're knee-deep in the dark water with your hands in the air
And the whole world's a watchin' with a window peek stare
And your good gal leaves and she's long gone a flyin'
And your heart feels sick like fish when they're fryin'
And your jackhammer falls from your hand to your feet
And you need it badly but it lays on the street
And your bells bangin' loudly but you can't hear its beat
And you think your ears might been hurt
Or your eyes've turned filthy from the sight-blindin' dirt
And you figured you failed in yesterday's rush
When you were faked out, an fooled white facin' a four flush
And all the time you were holdin' three queens
And it's makin' you mad, it's makin' you mean
Like in the middle of life magazine
Bouncin' around a pinball machine
And there's somethin' on your mind you wanna be sayin'
That somebody someplace oughta be hearin'
But it's trapped on your tongue and sealed in your head
And it bothers you badly when you're layin' in bed
And no matter how you try, you just can't say it
And you're scared to your soul, you just might forget it
And your eyes get swimmy from the tears in your head
And your pillows of feathers turn to blankets of lead
And the lion's mouth opens and your starin' at his teeth
And his jaws start closin' with you underneath
And you're flat on your belly with your hands tied behind
And you wish you'd never taken that last detour sign
And you say to yourself, ‽Just what am I doin'?
On this road I'm walkin', on this trail I'm turnin'
On this curve I'm hangin', on this pathway I'm strollin'
In the space I'm takin', in this air I'm inhalin'"
Am I mixed up too much, am I mixed up too hard?
Why am I walkin', where am I runnin'?
What am I sayin', what am I knowin'
On this guitar I'm playin', on this banjo I'm frailin'?
On this mandolin I'm strummin'
In the song I'm singin', in the tune I'm hummin'
In the words I'm writin', in the words that I'm thinkin'
In this ocean of hours, I'm all the time drinkin'
Who am I helpin', what am I breakin'?
What am I givin', what am I takin'?
But you try with your whole soul best
Never to think these thoughts and never to let
Them kind of thoughts gain ground or make your heart pound
But then again, you know why they're around
Just waitin' for a chance to slip and drop down
'Cause sometimes you hear 'em when the night times comes creepin'
And you fear that they might catch you a sleepin'
And you jump from your bed, from your last chapter of dreamin'
And you can't remember for the best of your thinkin'
If that was you in the dream that was screamin'
And you know that it's somethin' special you're needin'
And you know that there's no drug that'll do for the healin'
And no liquor in the land to stop your brain from bleedin'
And you need somethin' special
Yeah, you need somethin' special, all right
You need a fast flyin' train on a tornado track
To shoot you someplace and shoot you back
You need a cyclone wind on a stream engine howler
That's been bangin' and boomin' and blowin' forever
That knows your troubles a hundred times over
You need a Greyhound bus that don't bar no race
That won't laugh at your looks, your voice or your face
And by any number of bets in the book
Will be rollin' long after the bubblegum craze
You need somethin' to open up a new door
To show you somethin' you seen before
But overlooked a hundred times or more
You need somethin' to open your eyes
You need somethin' to make it known
That it's you and no one else that owns
That spot that you're standin', that space that you're sittin'
That the world ain't got you beat
That it ain't got you licked
It can't get you crazy, no matter how many times
You might get kicked
You need somethin' special all right
You need somethin' special to give you hope
But hope's just a word
That maybe you said or maybe you heard
On some windy corner, 'round a wide-angled curve
But that's what you need, man and you need it bad
And your trouble is you know it too good
'Cause you look and you start gettin' the chills
'Cause you can't find it on a dollar bill
And it ain't on Macy's window sill
And it ain't on no rich kid's road map
And it ain't in no fat kid's fraternity house
And it ain't made in no Hollywood wheat germ
And it ain't on that dim lit stage
With that half-wit comedian on it
Rantin' and ravin' and takin' your money
And you thinks it's funny
No, you can't find it in no night club or no yacht club
And it ain't in the seats of a supper club
And sure as hell, you're bound to tell
That no matter how hard you rub
You just ain't a gonna find it on your ticket stub
No and it ain't in the rumors people are tellin' you
And it ain't in the pimple lotion people are sellin' you
And it ain't in no cardboard box house
Or down any movie star's blouse
And you can't find it on the golf course
And Uncle Remus can't tell you and neither can Santa Claus
And it ain't in the cream puff hair-do or cotton candy clothes
And it ain't in the dime store dummies or bubblegum goons
And it ain't in the marshmallow noises of the chocolate cake voices
That come knockin' and tappin' in Christmas wrappin'
Sayin', ‽Ain't I pretty?†and ‽Ain't I cute?" and "Look at my skin
Look at my skin shine, look at my skin glow
Look at my skin laugh, look at my skin cryâ€
When you can't even sense if they got any insides
These people so pretty in their ribbons and bows
No, you'll not, now or no other day
Find it on the doorsteps made out a paper mache
And inside it the people made of molasses
That every other day buy a new pair of sunglasses
And it ain't in the fifty star generals and flipped out phonies
Who'd turn you in for a tenth of a penny
Who breathe and burp and bend and crack
And before you can count from one to ten
Do it all over again but this time behind your back, my friend
The one's that wheel and deal and whirl and twirl
And play games with each other in their sand-box world
And you can't find it either in the no talent fools
That run around gallant and make all rules for the ones that got talent
And it ain't in the ones that ain't got any talent
But think they do and think they're foolin' you
The ones who jump on the wagon
Just for a while 'cause they know it's in style
To get their kicks, get out of it quick
And make all kinds of money and chicks
And you yell to yourself and you throw down your hat
Sayin', "Christ, do I gotta be like that?
Ain't there no one here that knows where I'm at
Ain't there no one here that knows how I feel
Good God Almighty, that stuff ain't real"
No, but that ain't your game, it ain't your race
You can't hear your name, you can't see your face
You gotta look some other place
And where do you look for this hope that you're seekin'
Where do you look for this lamp that's a burnin'?
Where do you look for this oil well gushin'?
Where do you look for this candle that's glowin'?
Where do you look for this hope that you know is there
And out there somewhere?
And your feet can only walk down two kinds of roads
Your eyes can only look through two kinds of windows
Your nose can only smell two kinds of hallways
You can touch and twist and turn two kinds of doorknobs
You can either go to the church of your choice
Or you can go to Brooklyn State Hospital
You'll find God in the church of your choice
You'll find Woody Guthrie in Brooklyn State Hospital
And though it's only my opinion, I may be right or wrong
You'll find them both in Grand Canyon, sundown
When you think you're too old, too young, too smart or too dumb
When you're laggin' behind and losin' your pace
In a slow motion crawl of life's busy race
No matter what you're doing, if you start givin' up
If the wine don't come to the top of your cup
If the winds got you sideways with, with one hand holdin' on
And the other starts slippin' and the feelin' is gone
And your train engine fire needs a new spark to catch it
And the woods' easy findin' but you're lazy to fetch it
And your sidewalk starts curlin' and the street gets too long
And you start walkin' backwards though you know it's wrong
And lonesome comes up as down goes the day
And tomorrow's mornin' seems so far away
And you feel the reins from your pony are slippin'
And your rope is a slidin' 'cause your hands are a drippin'
And your sun-decked desert and evergreen valleys
Turn to broken down slums and trash-can alleys
And your sky cries water and your drain pipes a pourin'
And the lightnin's a flashin' and the thunders a crashin'
And the windows are rattlin' and breakin'
And the roof tops a shakin'
And your whole world's a slammin' and bangin'
And your minutes of sun turn to hours of storm
And to yourself, you sometimes say
"I never knew it was gonna be this way
Why didn't they tell me the day I was born?"
And you start gettin' chills and you're jumpin' from sweat
And you're lookin' for somethin' you ain't quite found yet
And you're knee-deep in the dark water with your hands in the air
And the whole world's a watchin' with a window peek stare
And your good gal leaves and she's long gone a flyin'
And your heart feels sick like fish when they're fryin'
And your jackhammer falls from your hand to your feet
And you need it badly but it lays on the street
And your bells bangin' loudly but you can't hear its beat
And you think your ears might been hurt
Or your eyes've turned filthy from the sight-blindin' dirt
And you figured you failed in yesterday's rush
When you were faked out, an fooled white facin' a four flush
And all the time you were holdin' three queens
And it's makin' you mad, it's makin' you mean
Like in the middle of life magazine
Bouncin' around a pinball machine
And there's somethin' on your mind you wanna be sayin'
That somebody someplace oughta be hearin'
But it's trapped on your tongue and sealed in your head
And it bothers you badly when you're layin' in bed
And no matter how you try, you just can't say it
And you're scared to your soul, you just might forget it
And your eyes get swimmy from the tears in your head
And your pillows of feathers turn to blankets of lead
And the lion's mouth opens and your starin' at his teeth
And his jaws start closin' with you underneath
And you're flat on your belly with your hands tied behind
And you wish you'd never taken that last detour sign
And you say to yourself, ‽Just what am I doin'?
On this road I'm walkin', on this trail I'm turnin'
On this curve I'm hangin', on this pathway I'm strollin'
In the space I'm takin', in this air I'm inhalin'"
Am I mixed up too much, am I mixed up too hard?
Why am I walkin', where am I runnin'?
What am I sayin', what am I knowin'
On this guitar I'm playin', on this banjo I'm frailin'?
On this mandolin I'm strummin'
In the song I'm singin', in the tune I'm hummin'
In the words I'm writin', in the words that I'm thinkin'
In this ocean of hours, I'm all the time drinkin'
Who am I helpin', what am I breakin'?
What am I givin', what am I takin'?
But you try with your whole soul best
Never to think these thoughts and never to let
Them kind of thoughts gain ground or make your heart pound
But then again, you know why they're around
Just waitin' for a chance to slip and drop down
'Cause sometimes you hear 'em when the night times comes creepin'
And you fear that they might catch you a sleepin'
And you jump from your bed, from your last chapter of dreamin'
And you can't remember for the best of your thinkin'
If that was you in the dream that was screamin'
And you know that it's somethin' special you're needin'
And you know that there's no drug that'll do for the healin'
And no liquor in the land to stop your brain from bleedin'
And you need somethin' special
Yeah, you need somethin' special, all right
You need a fast flyin' train on a tornado track
To shoot you someplace and shoot you back
You need a cyclone wind on a stream engine howler
That's been bangin' and boomin' and blowin' forever
That knows your troubles a hundred times over
You need a Greyhound bus that don't bar no race
That won't laugh at your looks, your voice or your face
And by any number of bets in the book
Will be rollin' long after the bubblegum craze
You need somethin' to open up a new door
To show you somethin' you seen before
But overlooked a hundred times or more
You need somethin' to open your eyes
You need somethin' to make it known
That it's you and no one else that owns
That spot that you're standin', that space that you're sittin'
That the world ain't got you beat
That it ain't got you licked
It can't get you crazy, no matter how many times
You might get kicked
You need somethin' special all right
You need somethin' special to give you hope
But hope's just a word
That maybe you said or maybe you heard
On some windy corner, 'round a wide-angled curve
But that's what you need, man and you need it bad
And your trouble is you know it too good
'Cause you look and you start gettin' the chills
'Cause you can't find it on a dollar bill
And it ain't on Macy's window sill
And it ain't on no rich kid's road map
And it ain't in no fat kid's fraternity house
And it ain't made in no Hollywood wheat germ
And it ain't on that dim lit stage
With that half-wit comedian on it
Rantin' and ravin' and takin' your money
And you thinks it's funny
No, you can't find it in no night club or no yacht club
And it ain't in the seats of a supper club
And sure as hell, you're bound to tell
That no matter how hard you rub
You just ain't a gonna find it on your ticket stub
No and it ain't in the rumors people are tellin' you
And it ain't in the pimple lotion people are sellin' you
And it ain't in no cardboard box house
Or down any movie star's blouse
And you can't find it on the golf course
And Uncle Remus can't tell you and neither can Santa Claus
And it ain't in the cream puff hair-do or cotton candy clothes
And it ain't in the dime store dummies or bubblegum goons
And it ain't in the marshmallow noises of the chocolate cake voices
That come knockin' and tappin' in Christmas wrappin'
Sayin', ‽Ain't I pretty?†and ‽Ain't I cute?" and "Look at my skin
Look at my skin shine, look at my skin glow
Look at my skin laugh, look at my skin cryâ€
When you can't even sense if they got any insides
These people so pretty in their ribbons and bows
No, you'll not, now or no other day
Find it on the doorsteps made out a paper mache
And inside it the people made of molasses
That every other day buy a new pair of sunglasses
And it ain't in the fifty star generals and flipped out phonies
Who'd turn you in for a tenth of a penny
Who breathe and burp and bend and crack
And before you can count from one to ten
Do it all over again but this time behind your back, my friend
The one's that wheel and deal and whirl and twirl
And play games with each other in their sand-box world
And you can't find it either in the no talent fools
That run around gallant and make all rules for the ones that got talent
And it ain't in the ones that ain't got any talent
But think they do and think they're foolin' you
The ones who jump on the wagon
Just for a while 'cause they know it's in style
To get their kicks, get out of it quick
And make all kinds of money and chicks
And you yell to yourself and you throw down your hat
Sayin', "Christ, do I gotta be like that?
Ain't there no one here that knows where I'm at
Ain't there no one here that knows how I feel
Good God Almighty, that stuff ain't real"
No, but that ain't your game, it ain't your race
You can't hear your name, you can't see your face
You gotta look some other place
And where do you look for this hope that you're seekin'
Where do you look for this lamp that's a burnin'?
Where do you look for this oil well gushin'?
Where do you look for this candle that's glowin'?
Where do you look for this hope that you know is there
And out there somewhere?
And your feet can only walk down two kinds of roads
Your eyes can only look through two kinds of windows
Your nose can only smell two kinds of hallways
You can touch and twist and turn two kinds of doorknobs
You can either go to the church of your choice
Or you can go to Brooklyn State Hospital
You'll find God in the church of your choice
You'll find Woody Guthrie in Brooklyn State Hospital
And though it's only my opinion, I may be right or wrong
You'll find them both in Grand Canyon, sundown
-- Bob Dylan
.........................................................................................
I find my spirit in 'Hegel's Hotel'....
Freud found his spirit in 'Psychoanalysis'....
How did Freud 'lose his spirit' -- before he 're-found it' -- in Psychoanalysis?
Stay tuned for Part 2 of this essay...soon to come...
-- dgb, Jan. 7th, 2012,
-- David Gordon Bain
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations....
-- Are Still in Process....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)