Changes

Aside from [[being ]] a [[theory ]] of the [[unconscious]], [[psychoanalysis ]] as a method is used as an investigative tool in a wide variety of fields, the [[treatment ]] of [[neuroses ]] being only one among many. The term <i>applied psychoanalysis</i> is often used to refer to fields [[other ]] than psychoanalysis or [[psychotherapy]], particularly [[literature]], art and [[culture]]. The term is therefore likely to have a range of accepted [[meanings ]] that is either very broad, as in the [[case ]] of collective phenomena, or narrowly restricted, as in the case of [[individual ]] works of art.The [[idea ]] of <i>application</i>, to the extent that it presupposes use [[outside ]] a field of origin, has often been criticized for introducing the risk that psychoanalysis will be used abstractly or mechanistically. This was certainly not the opinion of Sigmund [[Freud]], who felt that most [[psychoanalytic ]] [[concepts ]] were buttressed by the great [[myths ]] and works of literature, such as [[Sophocles]]'s <i>[[Oedipus ]] the King</i>, [[Michelangelo]]'s <i>[[Moses]]</i>, and [[Shakespeare]]'s <i>[[Hamlet]]</i>, which he mentioned in his [[letter ]] to Wilhelm [[Fliess ]] on October 15, 1897. Freud's later writings made use of the [[work ]] of Wilhelm Jensen, Dostoevsky, and [[others]]. There are also numerous references to [[Goethe ]] woven into the fabric of his [[thought]]. In this context we cannot really [[speak ]] of application but, rather, of different modes of expression for the investigation of what it means to be [[human]]. This proximity of culture and psychoanalysis also has the effect of mitigating the field's [[association ]] with [[medicine]], which was indeed one of Freud's objectives.

Freud's writings are interspersed with [[texts ]] that are not specifically [[about ]] [[psychopathology ]] but contribute to its [[development ]] indirectly. <i>[[Jokes ]] and their Relation to the Unconscious</i> (1905c), "[[Psycho]]-[[Analysis ]] and the Establishment of the Facts in [[Legal ]] Proceedings" (1906c), <i>[[Delusions ]] and [[Dreams ]] in Jensen's "Gradiva"</i> (1907a [1906]), "Obsessive Actions and [[Religious ]] Practices" (1907b), all written over a period of two years, reveal the variety of fields to which Freud applied the psychoanalytic method. More generally, psychoanalysis appears to embrace the fields of both individual [[therapy ]] and collective phenomena, although we cannot speak of applied psychoanalysis in the latter case. Examples include <i>[[Totem ]] and [[Taboo]]</i> (1912-1913a), <i>Group [[Psychology ]] and the Analysis of the Ego</i> (1921c), "The Acquisition and [[Control ]] of Fire" (1932a[1931]), and <i>Moses and [[Monotheism]]</i> (1939a [1937-1939]). Given the importance of these texts and their [[theoretical ]] richness, "applied psychoanalysis" in the broad [[sense ]] loses its [[meaning]].

An especially rich and frequently examined field is the psychoanalysis of works of literature and the plastic [[arts]]. When it turns its attention to the [[artist ]] or [[author]], the psychoanalytic approach is not really far removed from its psychotherapeutic [[role]]. Freud himself emphasized the proximity between the case study and the novel, asserting that his case studies could be read as novels (1895d) and that novelists knew more about the unconscious than [[psychoanalysts]].Yet, the matter is not quite as simple as it appears. Although studying an author's biography is relevant for [[understanding ]] his or her [[writing]], such an examination should not be reduced to a [[form ]] of pathography. Isidor Sadger was referred to as a <i>bungler</i> (Nunberg and Federn,1962-75) and Max Graf, supported by Freud, pointed out that an author's [[neurosis ]] does not explain his work. In "Creative Writers and Day-dreaming" (1908e [1907]), Freud shifted his focus to the question of the author's [[creativity ]] with the hypothesis of a relation between the daydream and the themes of [[literary ]] creation. He also questioned the [[nature ]] of the reader's [[pleasure]].In 1912 the review <i>[[Imago]]</i>, published by Freud with the [[help ]] of Otto Rank and [[Hans ]] Sachs, printed articles on psychoanalysis applied to works of art, but even

earlier, in 1910, Freud's study of [[Leonardo ]] [[da Vinci ]] (1910c) had shown the protean nature of this type of psychoanalytic investigation. This was a study of a "[[childhood ]] [[memory]]" of da Vinci's, and the earliest impressions of his [[life]]; it also provided an occasion to develop the theory of [[sublimation ]] in its various versions, along with a new approach to [[male ]] [[homosexuality]].Freud's paper on da Vinci is a [[good ]] example of the [[impossibility]], when referring to research devoted to a work of art (<i>The Virgin</i>, <i>[[Infant ]] [[Jesus]]</i>, and <i>Saint Ann</i>) and its author, of limiting oneself to a single "application" of the psychoanalytic method. This, with all the risks it entails (mistaking the kite for a vulture), is creative because it directs toward the analysis of the work of art hypotheses and intuitions that could have come into being elsewhere or differently, blending episodes of therapy with a [[self]]-[[analytic ]] approach (Freud's [[fantasy ]] [[relationship ]] with Leonardo).

Conversely, Freud's study of Michelangelo's Moses (1914b) ignored the facts of the artist's life. The [[interpretation ]] is based on the [[feelings ]] of the viewer, Freud in this case, and his understanding of the Bible. He explicates the work using the same method used for dreams, teasing out what is hidden or [[secret ]] by means of details that are barely [[visible]]. Freud does not sharply distinguish between interpretation of the work of art and reconstruction of the author's [[fantasies]], and when he turns to Jensen's <i>Gradiva</i> (1907a [1906]), it is only as an afterthought that he questions the author about the actual [[existence ]] of a young [[girl ]] with a club foot whom the author was supposed to have known in childhood.The term "applied psychoanalysis" does not seem to be appropriate when we consider that for Freud—as for many psychoanalysts like Karl [[Abraham]], Otto Rank, Wilhelm Stekel, Max Graf, Theodor Reik, and Fritz Wittels—it was not a question of demonstrating that the psychoanalytic method could be used outside the context of therapy (Laplanche proposed the expression, "extramural psychoanalysis"), but of developing hypotheses concerning this method within a field of research other than therapy.Aside from the psychoanalysis of works of art, Freud highlighted the interest of psychoanalysis (1913j) not only for psychology but for the other [[sciences]]. By "interest" he meant the implications—being in (<i>inter-esse</i>)—of psychoanalysis for the other sciences, which can make use of psychoanalysis as a means of self-enrichment and even [[self-analysis]]. Thus [[linguistics ]] could draw on dreams and [[symbols ]] for the study of [[language]], [[philosophy ]] could make use of the psychography of [[philosophers]], and [[biology ]] could borrow the opposition between ego [[instinct ]] and [[sexual ]] instinct to [[identify ]] the opposition between an immortal germ plasma and isolated individuals. Similarly, the [[history ]] of [[civilization ]] could make use of the psychoanalytic approach to [[myth ]] to help explain [[religion]].Nearly fifteen years later, in <i>The Question of [[Lay Analysis]]</i>, Freud wrote, "As a 'depth psychology,' a theory of the [[mental ]] unconscious, it can become indispensable to all the sciences which are concerned with the evolution of human civilization and its major institutions such as art, religion, and the [[social ]] [[order]]. It has already, in my opinion, afforded these sciences considerable help in solving their problems. But these are only small contributions compared with what might be achieved if historians of civilization, psychologists of religion, philologists and so on would agree themselves to handle the new [[instrument ]] of research which is at their service. The use of analysis for the treatment of the neuroses is only one of its applications; the [[future ]] will perhaps show that it is not the most important one" (1926e, p. 248).Of course it is not necessarily the case that the benefit of psychoanalysis for the sciences is a one-way [[process]]. Just as the "application" of psychoanalysis outside therapy leads to discoveries that [[affect ]] therapy through a deepening of theory and method, it benefits psychoanalysis to be questioned by the sciences with which it interacts. The "interactions of psychoanalysis" (Mijolla-Mellor, S. de) highlight the fact that it is [[impossible ]] to focus psychoanalysis on a specific [[domain ]] without the validity of its own methodology being questioned in turn. Such interactions assume the pursuit of a renewed [[epistemological ]] investigation of the [[value ]] of the psychoanalytic method and its ability to [[encounter ]] other logics. This not only provides new insight into the field of application but also helps clarify the essential nature and potential for growth of psychoanalysis itself. The principal [[reason ]] for this fecundity lies in the ability of psychoanalysis to allow itself to be questioned, and enriched, by, the fields of inquiry toward which it is directed.

Here, the [[cultural ]] [[object ]] or [[scientific ]] [[discourse ]] itself may exhibit a certain [[resistance ]] (much like a [[patient]]) because they function according to their own [[logic ]] and presuppositions, which in [[principle ]] acknowledge no unconscious [[dimension]]. To introduce this dimension

into other domains means that the [[psychoanalyst ]] must become newly aware of this object suspending the work of interpretation and, above all, questioning its ability not only to account for the facts in question but also for the way in which they are viewed and cathected.The multidisciplinary interactions of psychoanalysis thus require an ongoing epistemological investigation of major importance, and which risks being undermined if psychoanalysts [[limit ]] their inquiry to the therapeutic [[situation ]] alone. This perspective is epistemological first and foremost, opening up the possibility of borrowing other models and allowing for [[conceptual ]] fusion; but it also shows up the abiding (at [[times]]) specificity of fields of [[knowledge]], and even their impermeability—and hence the limits of these interactions.The common [[goal ]] of research in the field of "interactions with psychoanalysis" is an [[awareness ]] not only of the impact of Freud's discovery of the unconscious on the humanities (<i>Geisteswissenschaften</i>) but also of the effects of models specific to those domains on psychoanalysis itself, as theory and as method, whenever it attempts to "interact."

merican Imago; [[Anthropology ]] and psychoanalysis; Christians and [[Jews]]: A [[Psychoanalytical ]] Study; [[Cinema ]] (criticism); [[Cinema and psychoanalysis]]; Civilization (Kultur); "[[Claims of Psychoanalysis to Scientific Interest]]"; Criminology and psychoanalysis; Delusions and Dreams in Jensen's "Gradiva"; Don Juan and the [[Double]]; "[[Dream ]] and Myth"; École Freudienne de [[Paris]]; Ethnopsychoanalysis; [[Ethology ]] and psychoanalysis; Hard sciences, psychoanalysis and the; Freud, the Secret [[Passion]]; Goethe and psychoanalysis; [[Hamlet and Oedipus]]; History and psychoanalysis; Imago, Zeitschrift für die Anwendung der [[Psychanalyse ]] auf die Geistesiwissenschaften; [[Law and psychoanalysis]]; [[Leonardo da Vinci ]] and a Memory of his Childhood; [[Linguistics and psychoanalysis]]; [[Literary and artistic creation]]; Literature and psychoanalysis; [[Moses and Monotheism]]; "[[The Moses of Michelangelo]]"; Myth of the [[Birth ]] of the Hero, The; Mythology and psychoanalysis; ; Psyché, revue internationale de psychanalyse et des sciences de l'[[homme]]; Psychoanalysis of Fire, The; Psychoanalytic Bewegung, Die; Psychobiography; Psychohistory; Psychology and psychoanalysis; [[Racism]], [[anti-Semitism]], and psychoanalysis; [[Sartre ]] and psychoanalysis; Schiller and psychoanalysis; "Seventeenth-Century Demonological Neurosis, A"; [[Shakespeare and psychoanalysis]]; [[Sociology ]] and psychoanalysis, sociopsychoanalysis; [[Spinoza ]] and psychoanalysis; [[Structuralism ]] and psychoanalysis; [[Surrealism ]] and psychoanalysis; The Life and Works of Edgar Allen Poe; Thomas Woodrow Wilson, Twenty-Eighth President of the [[United States]]; [[Totem and Taboo]]; [[Training ]] of the psychoanalyst; [[Visual ]] arts and psychoanalysis.

* [[Freud, Sigmund]]. (1887-1904). The [[complete ]] letters of [[Sigmund Freud ]] to [[Wilhelm Fliess]], 1887-1904, Ed. and Trans. Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson. Cambridge, Mass, and [[London]]: The Belknap Press, 1985.

* ——. (1921c). [[Group psychology ]] and the analysis of the ego. SE, 18: 67-143.* ——. (1926e). The question of [[lay analysis]]. SE, 20: 179-250.

* ——. (1939a [1937-1939]). Moses and monotheism: [[Three ]] essays. SE, 23: 1-137.

* Nunberg, Hermann and Federn, Ernst. (1962-1975). Minutes of the [[Vienna ]] Psychoanalytic [[Society ]] (December 4, 1907 [[session]]). New York: International [[University ]] Press.