Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Art

2,135 bytes added, 02:13, 24 May 2019
The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles).
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. He explained artistic creation by reference to the concept of SUBLIMATION, a process in which sexual libido is redirected towards non-sexual aims. 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 (Freud, 1914b).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 in S2, ch. 16, and Lacan, 1955a), drama (e.g. the discussions of Shakespeare's Hamlet in Lacan, 1958-9, and of Sophocles' Antigone in S7, chs 19-21) and poetry (e.g. the discussion of Booz endormi by Victor Hugo in S3, 218- 25; S4, 377-8; E, 156-8; S8, 158-9). However, Lacan also discusses the visual {{Top}}arts, devoting several lectures in his 1964 seminar to discussing painting, particularly anamorphotic art (Sll, chs 7-9, where he discusses Holbein's The Ambassadors; see also S7, 139-42).There are, nevertheless, significant differences between the ways in which Freud and Lacan approach works of art. Though Lacan does speak about sublimation, unlike Freud he does not believe that it is possible or even desirable for psychoanalysts to say anything about the psychology of the artist on the basis of an examination of a work of art (see his critical remarks on 'psychobiography'; Ec, 740-1). 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 (Lacan, 1971: 3).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:{{Bottom}}
You must start from the text, start by treating it, as ====Sigmund Freud====[[Freud does and ]] valued [[art]] as he recommends, as Holy Writ. The author, the scribe, is only a pen-pusherone of [[human]]ity's great [[culture|cultural]] [[civilization|institutions]], and he comes second. . . . Similarly, when it comes to our patients, please give more attention dedicated many papers to discussing both the text than to the psychology [[process]] of the author - the entire orientation [[art|artistic creation]] in general and certain [[art|works of my teaching is thatart]] in [[particular]]. (S2, 153)
=====Artistic Creation=====
=====Sublimation=====
He explained [[art|artistic creation]] by reference to the [[concept]] of [[sublimation]], a process in which [[sexual]] [[libido]] is redirected towards [[sublimation|non-sexual aims]].
=====Works of Art=====
=====Literature=====
[[Freud]] also dedicated a [[number]] of papers to analysing particular [[art|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 [[poetry|poetic form]] [[truth]]s [[about]] the [[psyche]], which implies that [[art|creative writers]] can intuit directly the [[truth]]s which [[psychoanalysts]] only discover later by more laborious means.
# Secondly, [[Freud]] also argued that a close [[psychoanalytic]] [[interpretation|reading]] of [[art|works of literature]] could uncover elements of the author's [[psyche]].
=====Michelangelo's ''Moses''=====
While most of [[Freud]]'s [[Works of Sigmund Freud|papers]] on particular [[art|works of art]] concern [[art|works of literature]], he did not entirely neglect [[other]] [[art|art forms]]; for example he devoted one paper to discussing [[Michelangelo]]'s statue of [[Moses]].<ref>{{F}} "[[The Moses of Michelangelo]]," 1914b. [[SE]] XIII, 211.</ref>
====Jacques Lacan=========Works of Art=====[[Lacan]]'s discussions [[Works of literary texts are thus not exercises Jacques Lacan|works]] also abound in literary criticism for its own sake, but performances designed to give his audience an idea discussions of how they are to read the unconscious particular [[art|works 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 (although Jacques Derrida has argued that Lacan does not in fact follow his own method; see Derrida, 1975)art]].
Besides serving as models of a method of reading=====Literature=====Like [[Freud]], which [[Lacan recommends analysts ]] devotes most of his attention to follow when reading the discourse [[art|works of their patients, Lacan's discussions literature]] of literary texts also aim to extract certain elements which serve as metaphors to illustrate some of his most important ideasall genres: * [[art|prose]] (e.g. For example, in his reading the [[discussion]] of Poe's The [[Purloined Letter]] by [[Edgar Allan Poe]]<ref>{{S2}} Ch. 16; {{1955}}</ref>), Lacan points to the circulating LETTER as a metaphor for the 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 * [[art|drama]] (e.g. Muller and Richardson, 1988, and Wright, 1984; other works dealing with Lacan and cultural theory are Davis, 1983; Felman, 1987; MacCannell, 1986). 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 discussions of Lacan[[Shakespeare]]'s approach (to illustrate a mode of analytic interpretation[[Hamlet]] <ref>{{1958-9}}</ref>, 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[[Sophocles]]'s. Whereas some of Freud's works are often taken to imply that psychoanalysis is a metadiscourse[[Antigone]] <ref>{{S7}}, 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 claimsChs. For Lacan, while psychoanalysis might be able to learn something about literature, or use literary works to illustrate certain of its methods 19-21</ref>) and concepts, it is doubtful whether literary criticism can learn anything from psychoanalysis* [[art|poetry]] (e.g. Hence Lacan rejects the idea that a literary criticism which makes use discussion of psychoanalytic concepts could be called 'applied psychoanalysis', since '[[Booz endormi]] by Victor [[Hugo]]<ref>{{S3}} p]sychoanalysis is only applied, in the proper sense of the term, as a treatment, and thus to a subject who speaks and listens' (Ec, 747).Divides into psychological (personal) and visionary (collective)218-25; {{S4}} p. Art can never be reduced to psychopathology because visionary art is greater than its creator and draws on primordial images and forces377-8; {{E}} p. It stands on its own merits156-8; {{S8}} p. It compensates for the one158-sidedness of an era. Rather than a symptom or something secondary, it's a true symbolic expression, a reorganization of the conditions to which a causalistic explanation reduces it9</ref>).
=====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</ref>).
====Differences - Freud and Lacan====
There are, nevertheless, significant differences between the ways in which [[Freud]] and [[Lacan]] approach [[work|works of art]].
==References===Psychology of the Artist=====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 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> =====Authorial Intentions=====[[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.  =====Discourse of the Analysand=====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 [[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. . . . 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><references/blockquote=====Method of Reading=====[[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 [[interpretation|method of reading]] is similar to those employed by [[structuralism|formalism]] and [[structuralism]]; the [[signified]] is neglected in favour of the [[signifier]], [[structure|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> =====Illustrative Models=====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]]. ====="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 [[art|literature]] in the same way as [[Lacan]].  =====Analytic Interpretation=====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.
=====Metalanguage=====
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.
==See Also===Methods and Concepts=====<b>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]].</b>
====="Applied Psychoanalysis"=====
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>).
[[Category==References==<div style="font-size:Culture]]11px" class="references-small"><references/></div>
[[Category:Freudian psychology]]
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]]
[[Category:Dictionary]]
[[Category:Culture]]
 
__NOTOC__
Anonymous user

Navigation menu