Difference between revisions of "Art"
(→Jacques Lacan) |
|||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Like [[Freud]], [[Lacan]] devotes most of his attention to [[art|works of literature]] of all genres: | Like [[Freud]], [[Lacan]] devotes most of his attention to [[art|works of literature]] of all genres: | ||
* prose (e.g. the discussion of The Purloined Letter by Edgar Allan Poe<ref>{{S2}} Ch. 16; {{1955}}</ref>), | * prose (e.g. the discussion of The Purloined Letter by Edgar Allan Poe<ref>{{S2}} Ch. 16; {{1955}}</ref>), | ||
| − | * drama (e.g. the discussions of Shakespeare's Hamlet | + | * drama (e.g. the discussions of Shakespeare's Hamlet <ref>{{1958-9}}</ref>, and of [[Sophocles]]' [[Antigone]] <ref>{{S7}}, Chs. 19-21</ref>) and |
| − | * poetry (e.g. the discussion of Booz endormi by Victor Hugo | + | * poetry (e.g. the discussion of Booz endormi by Victor Hugo<ref>{{S3}} p. 218-25; {{S4}} p. 377-8; {{E}} p. 156-8; {{S8}} p. 158-9). |
| − | However, Lacan also discusses the visual arts, devoting several lectures in his 1964 seminar to discussing painting, particularly anamorphotic art | + | ===Visual Arts=== |
| + | However, [[Lacan]] also discusses the [[art|visual arts]], devoting several lectures in his [[Seminar XI|1964]] [[seminar]] to discussing [[art|painting]], particularly [[art|anamorphotic art]].<ref>{{S11}} Chs. 7-9, where he discusses [[Holbein]]'s [[The Ambassadors]]; {{S7}} p. 139-42). | ||
| − | ==Differences== | + | ==Differences between Freud and Lacan== |
| − | There are, nevertheless, significant differences between the ways in which Freud and Lacan approach works of art. | + | There are, nevertheless, significant differences between the ways in which [[Freud]] and [[Lacan]] approach [[work|works of art]]. |
| − | Though Lacan does speak about sublimation, unlike Freud he does not believe that it is possible or even desirable for | + | Though Lacan does speak about [[sublimation]], unlike [[Freud]] he does not believe that it is possible or even desirable for [[psychoanalyst]]s to say anything about the [[psychology]] of the [[art|artist]] on the basis of an examination of a [[art|work of art]].<ref>See his critical remarks on "[[art|psychobiography]]"; {{Ec}} 740-1</ref> |
| − | Just because the most fundamental complex (Oedipus) in psychoanalytic theory is taken from a literary work, Lacan says, does not mean that psychoanalysis has anything to say about Sophocles | + | Just because the most fundamental [[complex]] ([[Oedipus complex|Oedipus]]) in [[psychoanalytic theory]] is taken from a [[art|literary work]], [[Lacan]] says, does not mean that [[psychoanalysis]] has anything to say about [[Sophocles]].<ref>{{L}} "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Lituraterre]]," ''Littérature'', no. 3, 1971. p. 3</ref> |
==More== | ==More== | ||
| − | Lacan's exclusion of the artist from his discussions of works of art means that his | + | [[Lacan]]'s exclusion of the [[art|artist]] from his discussions of [[art|works of art]] means that his [[interpretation|reading]]s of [[art|literary texts]] are not concerned to reconstruct the [[author]]'s [[intention]]s. |
| − | In his suspension of the question of | + | In his suspension of the question of [[author]]ial [[consciousness|intent]], [[Lacan]] is not merely aligning himself with the [[structuralism|structuralist movement]] (after all, [[author]]ial [[consciousness|intent]] had been bracketed by [[art|New Criticism]] long before the [[structuralism|structuralists]] appeared on the [[scene]]), but is rather illustrating the way in which the [[analyst]] should proceed when [[free association|listening]] to and [[interpretation|interpreting]] the [[discourse]] of the [[analysand]]. |
| − | The analyst must, in other words, treat the analysand's discourse as a text: | + | The [[analyst]] must, in other words, treat the [[analysand]]'s [[discourse]] as a [[art|text]]: |
| − | <blockquote>You must start from the text, start by treating it, as Freud does and as he recommends, as Holy Writ. The author, the scribe, is only a pen-pusher, and he comes second. | + | <blockquote>You must start from the text, start by treating it, as Freud does and as he recommends, as Holy Writ. The author, the scribe, is only a pen-pusher, and he comes second. . . . Similarly, when it comes to our patients, please give more attention to the text than to the psychology of the author - the entire orientation of my teaching is that.<ref>{{S2}} p. 153</ref></blockquote> |
==More== | ==More== | ||
| − | Lacan's discussions of literary texts are thus not exercises in literary criticism for its own sake, but performances designed to give his audience an idea of how they are to read the unconscious of their | + | [[Lacan]]'s discussions of [[art|literary texts]] are thus not exercises in [[art|literary criticism]] for its own sake, but performances designed to give his audience an idea of how they are to read the [[unconscious]] of their [[patient]]s. |
| − | This method of reading is similar to those employed by formalism and structuralism; the signified is neglected in favour of the signifier, content is bracketed in favour of formal structures.<ref> | + | This method of reading is similar to those employed by [[structuralism|formalism]] and [[structuralism]]; the [[signified]] is neglected in favour of the [[signifier]], content is bracketed in favour of [[structure|formal structures]].<ref>Although [[Jacques Derrida]] has argued that [[Lacan]] does not in fact follow his own method; [[Jacques Derrida|Derrida, Jacques]] 1975. "Le facteur de la vérité," in ''The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond'', trans. Alan Bass, Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 413-96.</ref> and by two of Derrida's followers.<ref>Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe, and Nancy, Jean-Luc. 1973. ''Le Titre de la lettre'', Paris: Galilée.</ref> |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| + | ==Examples== | ||
| + | Besides serving as models of a [[interpretation|method of reading]], which [[Lacan]] recommends [[analyst]]s to follow when [[interpretation|reading]] the [[discourse]] of their [[patient]]s, [[Lacan]]'s discussions of [[art|literary texts]] also aim to extract certain elements which serve as [[metaphor]]s to illustrate some of his most important ideas. | ||
| − | + | For example, in his reading of [[Poe]]'s ''[[The Purloined Letter]]'', [[Lacan]] points to the circulating [[letter]] as a [[metaphor]] for the [[signifier|determinative power]] of the [[signifier]]. | |
| − | A new branch of so-called "psychoanalytic literary criticism" now claims to be inspired by Lacan's approach to literary texts | + | =="Psychoanalytic Literary Criticism"== |
| + | A new branch of so-called "[[art|psychoanalytic literary criticism]]" now claims to be inspired by [[Lacan]]'s approach to [[art|literary texts]]. | ||
| − | However, while such projects are interesting in their own right, they do not usually approach literature in the same way as Lacan. | + | However, while such projects are interesting in their own right, they do not usually approach literature in the same way as [[Lacan]]. |
| − | That is, while psychoanalytic literary criticism aims to say something about the texts studied, both aspects of Lacan's approach (to illustrate a mode of analytic interpretation, and to illustrate psychoanalytic concepts) are concerned not with saying something about the texts themselves, but merely with using the texts to say something about psychoanalysis. | + | That is, while [[art|psychoanalytic literary criticism]] aims to say something about the texts studied, both aspects of [[Lacan]]'s approach (to illustrate a mode of [[interpretation|analytic interpretation]], and to illustrate [[psychoanalytic]] [[:category:concepts|concepts]]) are concerned not with saying something about the texts themselves, but merely with using the texts to say something about [[psychoanalysis]]. |
This is perhaps the most important difference between [[Lacan]]'s approach to works of art and [[Freud]]'s. | This is perhaps the most important difference between [[Lacan]]'s approach to works of art and [[Freud]]'s. | ||
| − | Whereas some of [[Freud]]'s works are often taken to imply that psychoanalysis is a metadiscourse, a master narrative providing a general lutmeneutic key that can unlock the hitherto unsolved secrets of literary works, it is impossible to read [[Lacan]] as making any such claims. | + | Whereas some of [[Freud]]'s works are often taken to imply that [[psychoanalysis]] is a [[metalanguage|metadiscourse]], a [[metalanguage|master narrative]] providing a general lutmeneutic key that can unlock the hitherto unsolved secrets of [[art|literary works]], it is impossible to read [[Lacan]] as making any such claims. |
| − | For [[Lacan]], while psychoanalysis might be able to learn something about literature, or use literary works to illustrate certain of its methods and concepts, it is doubtful whether literary criticism can learn anything from psychoanalysis. | + | For [[Lacan]], while psychoanalysis might be able to learn something about [[art|literature]], or use [[art|literary works]] to illustrate certain of its [[treatment|methods]] and [[:category:concepts|concepts]], it is doubtful whether [[art|literary criticism]] can learn anything from [[psychoanalysis]]. |
| − | Hence [[Lacan]] rejects the idea that a literary criticism which makes use of psychoanalytic concepts could be called | + | Hence [[Lacan]] rejects the idea that a [[art|literary criticism]] which makes use of [[psychoanalytic]] [[:category:concepts|concepts]] could be called "[[art|applied psychoanalysis]]", since "[p]sychoanalysis is only applied, in the proper sense of the term, as a treatment, and thus to a subject who speaks and listens."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 747</ref>). |
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 08:40, 28 August 2006
| French: art |
Sigmund Freud
Freud valued art as one of humanity's great cultural institutions, and dedicated many papers to discussing both the process of artistic creation in general and certain works of art in particular.
Sublimation
He explained artistic creation by reference to the concept of sublimation, a process in which sexual libido is redirected towards non-sexual aims.
Works of Literature
Freud also dedicated a number of papers to analysing particular works of art, especially works of literature, which he argued could be useful to psychoanalysis in two main ways.
- Firstly, these works often express in poetic form truths about the psyche, which implies that creative writers can intuit directly the truths which psychoanalysts only discover later by more laborious means.
- Secondly, Freud also argued that a close psychoanalytic reading of works of literature could uncover elements of the author's psyche.
While most of Freud's papers on particular works of art concern works of literature, he did not entirely neglect other art forms; for example he devoted one paper to discussing Michelangelo's statue of Moses.[1]
Jacques Lacan
Lacan's works also abound in discussions of particular works of art.
Like Freud, Lacan devotes most of his attention to works of literature of all genres:
- prose (e.g. the discussion of The Purloined Letter by Edgar Allan Poe[2]),
- drama (e.g. the discussions of Shakespeare's Hamlet [3], and of Sophocles' Antigone [4]) and
- poetry (e.g. the discussion of Booz endormi by Victor HugoCite error: Closing
</ref>missing for<ref>tag
Just because the most fundamental complex (Oedipus) in psychoanalytic theory is taken from a literary work, Lacan says, does not mean that psychoanalysis has anything to say about Sophocles.[5]
More
Lacan's exclusion of the artist from his discussions of works of art means that his readings of literary texts are not concerned to reconstruct the author's intentions.
In his suspension of the question of authorial intent, Lacan is not merely aligning himself with the structuralist movement (after all, authorial intent had been bracketed by New Criticism long before the structuralists appeared on the scene), but is rather illustrating the way in which the analyst should proceed when listening to and interpreting the discourse of the analysand.
The analyst must, in other words, treat the analysand's discourse as a text:
You must start from the text, start by treating it, as Freud does and as he recommends, as Holy Writ. The author, the scribe, is only a pen-pusher, and he comes second. . . . Similarly, when it comes to our patients, please give more attention to the text than to the psychology of the author - the entire orientation of my teaching is that.[6]
More
Lacan's discussions of literary texts are thus not exercises in literary criticism for its own sake, but performances designed to give his audience an idea of how they are to read the unconscious of their patients.
This method of reading is similar to those employed by formalism and structuralism; the signified is neglected in favour of the signifier, content is bracketed in favour of formal structures.[7] and by two of Derrida's followers.[8]
Examples
Besides serving as models of a method of reading, which Lacan recommends analysts to follow when reading the discourse of their patients, Lacan's discussions of literary texts also aim to extract certain elements which serve as metaphors to illustrate some of his most important ideas.
For example, in his reading of Poe's The Purloined Letter, Lacan points to the circulating letter as a metaphor for the determinative power of the signifier.
"Psychoanalytic Literary Criticism"
A new branch of so-called "psychoanalytic literary criticism" now claims to be inspired by Lacan's approach to literary texts.
However, while such projects are interesting in their own right, they do not usually approach literature in the same way as Lacan.
That is, while psychoanalytic literary criticism aims to say something about the texts studied, both aspects of Lacan's approach (to illustrate a mode of analytic interpretation, and to illustrate psychoanalytic concepts) are concerned not with saying something about the texts themselves, but merely with using the texts to say something about psychoanalysis.
This is perhaps the most important difference between Lacan's approach to works of art and Freud's.
Whereas some of Freud's works are often taken to imply that psychoanalysis is a metadiscourse, a master narrative providing a general lutmeneutic key that can unlock the hitherto unsolved secrets of literary works, it is impossible to read Lacan as making any such claims.
For Lacan, while psychoanalysis might be able to learn something about literature, or use literary works to illustrate certain of its methods and concepts, it is doubtful whether literary criticism can learn anything from psychoanalysis.
Hence Lacan rejects the idea that a literary criticism which makes use of psychoanalytic concepts could be called "applied psychoanalysis", since "[p]sychoanalysis is only applied, in the proper sense of the term, as a treatment, and thus to a subject who speaks and listens."[9]).
References
- ↑ Freud, Sigmund. "The Moses of Michelangelo," 1914b. SE XIII, 211.
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. Ch. 16; Lacan, Jacques. 1955a. "Le séminaire sur 'La lettre volée'", in Jacques Lacan, Écrits, Paris: Seuil, 1966, pp. 11-61 ["Seminar on 'The Purloined Letter'", trans. Jeffrey Mehlman, Yale French Studies, 48 (1972): 38-72.
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre VI. Le désir et son interprétation, 1958-59, published in part n Ornicar?, 24-27, 1981-83 ["Desire and Interpretation of Desire in Hamlet," trans. James Hulbert, Yale French Studies, vol. 55/6, 1977: 11-52].
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book VII. The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, 1959-60. Trans. Dennis Porter. London: Routledge, 1992., Chs. 19-21
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. "Lituraterre," Littérature, no. 3, 1971. p. 3
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p. 153
- ↑ Although Jacques Derrida has argued that Lacan does not in fact follow his own method; Derrida, Jacques 1975. "Le facteur de la vérité," in The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond, trans. Alan Bass, Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 413-96.
- ↑ Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe, and Nancy, Jean-Luc. 1973. Le Titre de la lettre, Paris: Galilée.
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 747
