Finished! -- Sept 24th, 2011...
One of the problems with writing over a thousand essays on the internet -- within my metaphorical 'Virtual World' here that I just named 'Freud's Hotel', one now of a chain of 'Hegel's Hotels' -- is that oftentimes you forget what you have already written. Or at least I do.
I'm in the process of writing an essay, Google resurfaces an old essay that I wrote last June, and surprise, I find I am still writing on the same subject matter. A little different take perhaps, a slightly different angle, a little more emphasis here as opposed to there -- but still, it is a similar essay on the same subject matter.
Do I drop the essay I am writing -- and delete it -- in favor of what I have already written? Have I become stuck in neutral -- 'fixated' on the same subject matter over and over again, obsessive-compulsively, til death do us part? Or is there still a 'growth point' around the subject matter that I am writing about where I can still better clarify and expand my point of view?
Such is my case with the whole 'Seduction Theory Controversy' -- it has been driving me -- and driving me 'nuts' -- since I was first introduced to the subject matter back in the 1990s by Masson ('Final Analysis', 'The Assault on Truth: Freud's Suppression of The Seduction Theory'), and also partly by Janet Malcolm (In The Freud Archives) who Masson sued in 1984 for alleged 'fabricated quotations'.
.........................................................................................
From Wikipedia...
In his 1984 lawsuit, Masson claimed that Malcolm had libelled him by fabricating quotations attributed to him; these quotes, Masson contended, had brought him into disrepute. After a decade of proceedings, a jury finally found against Masson in 1994 on the grounds that, whether or not the quotations were genuine, more evidence was needed to rule against Malcolm. (For the opinion of the Supreme Court that allowed the case to proceed to trial, see the opinion at Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, Inc. (89-1799), 501 U.S. 496 (1991))
................................................................................................
Just because she won, does not mean that Malcolm wasn't guilty as charged. Masson just couldn't put enough court evidence together 'to prove' his case. Ironically, Malcolm wrote and published a book in 1990 -- before the court case even ended in 1994! -- called 'The Journalist and The Murderer' .
The Journalist and the Murderer
The thesis of The Journalist and the Murderer is contained in its first sentence: "Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible."[5]
(My emphasis.)
..............................................................................
Amazing! Sounds like a confession to me as I am sure it did to everyone else who was involved in the court case back at that time...But she still won the case...or at least indirectly...backed by New Yorker money as it looks like it was The New Yorker that was directly being sued....
Speaking of qoutes, here is one that came into my email box this morning.
...............................................................................
Today's Inspirational Quote:
"Never idealize others. They will never live up to your
expectations. (My emphasis.) Don't over-analyze your relationships. Stop
playing games. A growing relationship can only be nurtured by
genuineness."
-- Leo Buscaglia
...........................................................................
I have looked at both sides of The 1980s Seduction Theory Controversy, partly supported -- and railed against -- both sides at different times. I have come down hard on Freud at different times -- harder than even Masson -- mainly because I looked at Freud's cocaine abuse which was still alive around the time of Emma Ekstein's botched surgery in February 1895, and possibly years afterwards.
I mean Freud's cocaine abuse is just as relative to the history of Psychoanalysis as 'the steroid scandal' is relative to the history of baseball. The question needs to be asked -- though no-one else will ask it -- 'Does Freud's work and the finished product of Classical Psychoanalysis lose any credibility because Freud was using and abusing cocaine right through some of the most important years in the history and evolution of Psychoanalysis?
Freud was perhaps the most brilliantly creative theorist who ever lived. And he was a 'risk-taker' who would go into extreme places both physically and conceptually where other scientists, therapists, and theorists wouldn't go near. In the process, Freud had a few botched mishaps that -- looking back at it now -- probably signifcantly damaged the integrity and crediblity of his character. Masson saw this. I saw this. Swailes saw this. Others have seen this and said nothing. All you have to do is read Freud's Complete Letters to Fliess. And yet Freud didn't ask of others anything that he was unwilling to do himself. Freud had the same surgery on his nasal passageway that Emma Ekstein had on hers. Were both tied to cocaine use and abuse? Seems very likely, at least in Freud's case as Freud was showing all the classic symptoms of cocaine abuse back during this time -- heart irregularities, headaches, nasal problems including pus running out of his nose, depression, and feeling better with the use of the drug....
All of this flies in the face of the way most of us -- including me -- would like to 'idealize' Freud. And yet, the closer we get to a person and his or her actual life, the more likely we are to see their 'warts', their liabilities, and their vulnerabilities....Freud is no different. He was who he was -- and that was not always a hero. In 1895 and 1896, Freud looked like he was going to be a 'civil rights leader' for women -- detailing their privately suppressed and repressed abuses at the hands of men...
But for whatever reason, legitimate or not, justified or not -- probably at least 'tainted' -- Freud partly turned his back on women and started to pursue a different line of thinking entirely that seemed to actually further 'supress' and 'repress' the types of masculine sexual abuses that Freud openly brought to the attention of The Vienna Psychiatry and Neurology Society on April 21st, 1896. For there would be no further talk about 'childhood sexual abuse' and instead his mind would roll into such areas as 'Childhood Sexuality', 'Fantasy Theory', 'Intstinct Theory', 'The Psycho-Sexual Stages of Development, and 'The Oedipal Complex' (which could be used pathologically to actually 'cover up' the real existence of incestuous family relations, particularly between father and daughter...
Now, I don't want to go on til my dying days harping on this whole matter....going back and forth, back and forth, ad nauseum....Mainly I would simply like to 'fix the problem'.....and help Classical Psychoanalysis evolve into something better than the 'stagnant, sterile, and/or bacterial infested pond' that it has more or less has become and remained as since Freud died...
Not too many theorist today -- at least to my awareness -- want to touch Classical Psychoanalysis with a ten foot pole. They either want to leave it completely the way it is. Or they want to move to some other different 'brand' of Psychoanalysis such as Object Relations, Self Psychology, Lacanian Psychoanalysis....or beyond....
In contrast, I want to remain within the basic Classical Freudian model or paradigm and make some significant adjustements to it. Such as bring back elements of 'Pre-Classical' Psychoanalysis (say, 1893 up to May 4th, 1896) and integrate it into the rest of Classical Psychoanalysis.
Here is where we have problems with Freud's Classic Definition and Description of 'The Id'....But not necessarily...
The stereotyped image of the Id is basically a type of 'reservoir of very uncivil and/or deemed unacceptable human impulses' -- particularly of the 'sexual and/or destructive variety'.
The Id is visioned by Freud as either being more or less synonymous with the unconscious which is not a very good way to look at either the Id or The Unconcious....
Instead, more appropriately, the 'rawest form of the Id' should be envisioned as being found in the deepest part of the un/subconcious.
This idea allows for two types of modifications on Classical Freudian Theory. One, distinguishing other elements of the subconscious such as in order of 'depth' from bottom to top in my post-Freudian paradigm:
1. 'The Genetic-Potential-Symbolic (GPS)Self';
2. 'The Black Hole (Chaos, The Apeiron, or Nietzsche's Abyss)' That place where we all most dread to go -- or fall -- under conditions where we lose control of our day to day existence and self; 'Nervous or Psychotic Breakdown Territory'...Can at the same time be our 'Phoenix' of potential new life and the beginning of great new creativity if or when we start to become more 'self-assured' again, and begin to take stock of ourself, our talents, our life dreams, and the direction that we want to go in life that satisfies us -- not the world around us;
3 'The ID or IT' or 'Shadow-Id' (Unbound 'Idian' Life and/or Death Impulse Energy'); The Volcano or Fountain of All Forms of Life and Death Energy to The Self, The Whole Personality, Parts of Which Flow To Different Parts of The Ego and Superego;
4. 'The ID or IT' or 'Shadow-Id' (SID) Vault (Idian Life and/or Death Impulse Energy Bound Up, Vaulted Up, Restrained, Repressed or Suppressed, Defended Against By 'Ego-Defenders' That For The Most Part, Under Normal Conditions, Keep The Most Impermissable Parts of The Self Safely Under 'Lock and Key' Either Permanently or Til The Appropriate Time of Its Perceived 'Safe Release');
5. The Learning and Transference Complexes and Templates (Everything we learn as we evolve, especially important are our 'transference learnings' from early childhood (3 to 7 years old being our 'critical transference memory period', and our critical 'transference relationship' period lasting longer, usually into our teens; Both 'traumacy' theory and 'Oedipal Theory' are totally relevant to our transference period and often intertwine with each other in our psychological and emotional evolution;
6. The Day's 'Existential and/or Transference' Residue (Leftover Meaningful Pieces of The Day's Experience That Become Subject To Night Dream Activity);
7. The Dream Weaver (Creator of our dreams, nightmares, and fantasies that both hide and allude to our 'day's residues' and to our 'transference complexes';
There -- that will give you something to mull over and muse yourself with before we move on.
-- dgb, Sept. 24th, 2011,
-- David Gordon Bain
