Just finished...June 1st, 2011...
To study -- and properly understand Freud -- you need to have a good handle on all of his writing from about 1894 to 1939 -- 45 years of writing as captured in Strachey's 24 Volume Standard Edition. And even that may not be enough. Freud was a constantly evolving thinker -- some of his ideas remained relatively constant for the whole 45 years, and others were turned upside down like they were written by Freud's 'alter-ego' -- with no creative integration in the middle.
In this latter regard, I am talking mainly about the radical change Freud made to Psychoanalysis in 1896. But there are other very significant examples like 'On Narcissism' in 1914, 'Beyond The Pleasure Principle' in 1920, and 'The Ego and The Id' in 1923. Even what we usually call 'Classical' Psychoanalysis was hugely different in 1905 than it was, say, after 1923.
I don't have a complete handle on all 45 years of Freud's work yet but I am getting there slowly, and am still learning new things from and about Freud, as I continue to write here.
Each Freudian essay -- and each provocative assertion within a particular essay -- is a written 'sound bite' that in the end needs to be understood in the context of the full 45 years of Freud's writing -- and what was happening historically in Freud's life as he was writing what he was writing. This, in my view, is how to best understand the evolution -- and at times, 'de-evolution' -- of Freud and 'Classical' Psychoanalysis.
By the way, I belive and strongly advocate that 'Classical' Psychoanalysis should be re-defined as all major 45 years of Freud's writing (from 1894 to 1939), not from say, 1899 to 1939 which leaves out the first major five years of Freud's writing including a 'suppression' as Masson would put it, of Freud's 'Traumacy' and 'Seduction' theories.
If Freudian loyalists want to scream and say that this would make Psychoanalysis 'internally contradictory', I would smile and say, "Well yes, and so too are the men and women that Psychoanalysis is trying to understand at the deepest level -- so too, are they 'internally contradictory' so the 'internally contradictory model' of human thinking, feeling, and behaving -- it is completely appropriate and functionally necessary to a complete understanding of the 'human psychic territory' it seeks to deeply understand!"
Furthermore, deep tensions, stressful conflicts, and seemingly insurmountable contradictions when fully tackled and negotiated by the human mind or minds -- can lead to fabulous, creative, dialectic integrations than foster temporary (shorter or longer lasting) evolutionary 'unified dialectic homeostatic balances'!
And that my friends, is what Hegel's Hotel is all about.
Having spent significant parts of almost the last 40 years myself (1972 to 2011) studying most of the major schools of psychology and psychotherapy, I find myself in a position now of putting significant parts of all these different 'schools' of ideas together into a 'New Gestalt' -- and since I am particularly mesmerized by Freud these days -- I want 'Classical Psychoanalysis' -- or at least a rather hugely radical modification and extension of Freud's 'Classical' Psychoanalysis -- to be at centre stage of my 'freshly evolving -- and long time coming -- gestalt'. I could have made it 'Gestalt Therapy' or 'Adlerian Theory' or even 'Analytic' (Jungian) Theory'.
But informally speaking, I am a Freudian theorist at centre stage with 'satellite inspirations' from Object Relations, Self Psychology, Gestalt Therapy, Adlerian Psychology, Jungian Psychology, Frommian Theory, Transactional Analysis, Primal Theory, Cognitive Theory, and General Semantics Theory.
Having said this, as a therapist, I would use a 'hot seat' and an 'empty chair' for my client, not a 'couch'.
If I had Freud on the 'hot seat', I would be directive at some point -- if Freud didn't get there first -- and ask him to speak to Emma Ekstein, and Krafft-Ebbing, and Dora, and Fleischel, and Fliess, and Jung, and his father...during the same or different work pieces, depending on the context of what went down in particular segments of Freud's 'personal work'...
And at some point I would find out exactly why Freud abandoned his Traumacy and Seduction Theories -- even though I think I already know. I think Freud developed his 'Fantasy Theory' as a defense against the personal and social consequences of his previous 'RealityTheory'. When Freud wanted to deny and escape from the personal guilt and traumacy he felt from the Emma Ekstein medical scandal, he turned to 'fantasy theory'. He turned to his 'longing theory'. Emma Ekstein became a 'hysterical bleeder' because she 'longed to be with' her two misguided medical therapists who almost killed her (Fliess and Freud) -- and 'bleeding' was the way that she (unconsciously believed that she) could bring them back to her when they were gone for too long. The bleeding was no longer (reality theory) because there was half a metre (or however long it was) of gauze stuck up her nose for almost a month because Fliess had forgotten that he had put it there. Until another doctor finally found it up there, having been called in on an emergency basis to deal with a 'nasal crisis' that had poor Emma 'moaning to the moon', the new doctor pulled at he didn't know what yet, and out came the gauze -- and a quart or two of blood after it-- as Emma almost bled to death after the gauze was shockingly pulled out by the unknowing new doctor.
That 'personal traumacy' in Freud's life (as well as Emma's of course) was in February, 1895. The Krafft-Ebbing Medical Society Affair was in April 1896. Here too, in the same letter on May 4th, 1896, Freud dealt with two 'different traumacies' in his personal life in the space of a year -- in the same way -- he replaced 'reality theory' with 'fantasy (longing) theory'. In both cases, the 'fantasy theory' could also be viewed as a 'blame the victim' theory. In April 1896, Freud's 'Seduction Theory' was ridiculed by the Scientific-Medical (Psychiatry-Neurology) Society of Vienna. Krafft-Ebbing -- and the 'other boys' did not want to have anything to do with a theory that linked 'hysteria' to 'childhood sexual assault' by an adult male -- and usually the father. Between the 'traumatic meeting' on April 21st when Krafft-Ebbing said that Freud's newest theory was like a 'scientific fairy tale' -- and May 4th when Freud wrote to Fliess his most insightful letter into the workings of his own psyche relative to both the Emma Ekstein and the Krafft-Ebbing traumatic events -- and trying to find a 'conflict-resolution' and a 'compromise-formation' to both of them, Freud finally got his wish -- a 'wish theory' -- his female clients who said that they had been 'sexually assaulted' as children only 'wished' that their fathers had 'seduced' them....and Emma Ekstein 'wished' the blood out of her nostrils...
And so 'Classical' Psychoanalysis was born...
....................................................
Oh, but you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears
Bury the rag deep in your face
For now's the time for your tears.
-- Bob Dylan (The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll)
....................................................................................
We need to do better.
Psychoanalysis needs to do better.
Freud 'ethically failed'.
Kurt Eissler 'ethically failed' in his loyal support of Freud's 'ethical integrity'.
Anna Freud 'ethically failed' in her loyal support of her dad's 'ethical integrity' .
Who ever is leading The Psychoanalytic Empire today...
Is still 'ethically failing'....
Masson read -- and published -- The Complete Letters from Freud to Fliess, and having read them, he concluded and publicly asserted that Freud had 'lost moral courage' after 1896 when he started to abandon/suppress the Seduction Theory.
For this public assertion, Masson was 'dismissed' from his job and career as newly appointed 'Projects Director of The Freud Archives'...and 'ex-communicated' from Psychoanalysis (back around 1982). This was kind of like the way Spinoza was 'ex-communicated' from The Holland Jewish Orthodox Church for spilling out ideas of 'pantheism' which they believed was a 'sneaky form of atheism'. And Spinoza went on to become perhaps the most famous 'Holland Jew'...
However, even Masson partly failed for not pulling his argument strongly enough together in a way that people -- both academics and laypersons -- could both clearly understand, and more importantly, fully believe.
In a short email interview I did with Masson, Masson said that he wished he had written a 'longer' version of 'The Assault on Truth' -- with a much longer list of impeccable references...
I believed to myself at the time -- and still believe -- that that was not what was missing from Masson's argument.
The logic had to be airtight.
And the writing had to be done with the full impact of....
A Nietzschean Hammer...
Masson came down hard on Freud...
But not hard enough...
The argument needed to be more blatantly clear...and
'Beyond reasonable doubt'...
Once people finished shaking their collective heads...
And could finally start to get their heads around...
What really happened in Freud's life in 1895 and 1896...
And how it affected what he did...
And why he so quickly and radically changed...
The Face and Destiny...
Of Psychoanalysis...
Then they could probably finally start to fully accept...
The idea...
That Freud had really 'messed up' bigtime back in 1895 and 1896...
In the way that he 'unpainted' himself out of a really 'tight corner'...
This was not the first time that he had done this...
Something similar had happened back in the late 1880s....
When he first met his most dangerous lover...
Cocaine...
And when he gave this 'magic elixir' to one of his best friends...(Fleischel) to help 'wean him off' of another dangerous lover -- morphine...
Even as more and more negative reports were coming in as to cocaine's dangerous qualities and very addictive component....
Freud still gave out cocaine like it was 'the fountain of youth'...or 'candy' on Halloween...
At least until it...
Played a part in his friend's death in 1991...
Most scholars seem to publicly subscribe to the theory that Freud 'dropped cocaine' shortly after this tragic event...
And yet cocaine again seemed to be involved....
In the Emma Ekstein medical fiasco of 1895....
That almost cost her her life...and did cost her...
The disfigurement of her pretty face for the rest of her life...
After all of this....
Freud was still trying his best to absolve himself of all guilt...
And 'blame the victim' instead...
Out of this, came his 'wishful thinking' theory...
And Classical Psychoanalysis was 'unethically born'...
When scholars and laypersons can finally fully accept this interpretation...
Of Freudian and Psychoanalytic History....
Then we can all sit down together...
Or follow me if you can...
As we start to build a 'New Integrative Psychoanalysis' for the 21st Century...
In which all 45 years of Freud's writing is important...
To the extent that it doesn't include 'Narcissistic Victorian and Masculine Biases'....and 'Blaming The Victim'...
And to the extent that...
The first major 3 years of Freud's writing -- from 1894 to 1896...
Is not 'abandoned' nor 'suppressed'...
Nor 'defended' against...
Like some 'neurotic' client...
Defends against...
Abandons...
Suppresses...
Dissociates...
Projects...
The 'traumatic reality'
That he or she cannot bear
To face...
Before he or she turns away from painful reality...
And puts on a 'pretty, wishful face'...
So that the public can't see...
That he or she is crying -- or raging -- inside...
-- dgb, June 1st, 2011,
-- David Gordon Bain
..........................................................................
Some of Freud's best works both before and after 1897...
The Neuro-Psychoses of Defense (1894),
Studies on Hysteria (with Breuer, 1895),
The Aetiology of Hysteria (1896)
The Interpretation of Dreams (1899-1900),
Three Essays on The Theory of Sexuality (1905),
The Dynamics of The Transference (1912),
On Narcissism (1914),
Beyond The Pleasure Principle (1920),
The Ego and The Id (1923)
...........................................................
