Changes

In recent years, it’s often been said that psychoanalysis is dead. New advances in the brain sciences have finally put it where it belongs, alongside religious confessors and dream-readers in the lumber-room of pre-scientific obscurantist searches for hidden meaning. As Todd Dufresne put it, no figure in the history of human thought was more wrong about all the fundamentals – with the exception of Marx, some would add. ''The Black Book of Communism'' was followed last year {{Title}}by the ''Black Book of Psychoanalysis'', which listed all the theoretical mistakes and instances of clinical fraud perpetrated by Freud and his followers. In this way, at least, the profound solidarity of Marxism and psychoanalysis is now there for all to see.[[Slavoj Žižek]]{{Author}}

A century agoIn [[recent]] years, Freud included it’s often been said that [[psychoanalysis as one ]] is [[dead]]. New advances in the brain [[sciences]] have finally put it where it belongs, alongside [[religion|religious]] [[confession|confessors]] and [[dream|dream-readers]] in the lumber-room of what he described as the three ‘narcissistic illnesses’pre-[[scientific]] obscurantist searches for hidden [[meaning]]. First As [[Todd Dufresne]] put it, Copernicus demonstrated that the Earth moves around no [[figure]] in the Sun, thereby depriving humans [[history]] of their central place in [[human]] [[thought]] was more wrong [[about]] all the universe. Then Darwin demonstrated that we are fundamentals – with the product exception of evolution[[Marx]], thereby depriving us some would add. ''[[The Black Book of our privileged place among living beings. Finally, Communism]]'' was followed last year by making clear the predominant role ''[[Black Book of the unconscious in psychic processesPsychoanalysis]]'', Freud showed that which listed all the ego is not master even in its own house. Today, scientific breakthroughs seem to bring further humiliation: the mind is merely a machine for data-processing, our sense [[theoretical]] mistakes and instances of freedom [[clinical]] fraud perpetrated by [[Freud]] and autonomy merely a ‘user’s illusion’his followers. In comparisonthis way, at least, the conclusions profound [[solidarity]] of [[Marxism]] and psychoanalysis seem rather conservativeis now there for all to see.

Is A century ago, [[Freud]] included [[psychoanalysis outdated? It certainly appears to be]] as one of what he described as the [[three]] '[[narcissistic illnesses]]'. It is outdated scientifically First, in [[Copernicus]] demonstrated that the cognitivist-neurobiologist model of [[Earth]] moves around the [[Sun]], thereby depriving [[human mind has superseded ]]s of their central [[place]] in the Freudian model; it is outdated in [[universe]]. Then [[Darwin]] demonstrated that we are the psychiatric clinicproduct of [[evolution]], where psychoanalytic treatment is losing ground to drug treatment and behavioural therapy; and it is outdated in society more broadlythereby depriving us of our privileged place among [[living]] [[being]]s. Finally, where by making clear the notion predominant [[role]] of social norms which repress the individual’s sexual drives doesn’t hold up [[unconscious]] in [[psyche|psychic]] [[process]]es, Freud showed that the [[ego]] is not [[master]] even in its own house. Today, [[science|scientific]] breakthroughs seem to bring further [[humiliation]]: the face [[mind]] is merely a [[machine]] for data-processing, our [[sense]] of today’s hedonism[[freedom]] and [[autonomy]] merely a 'user’s [[illusion]]'. But we should not be too hasty. Perhaps we should instead insist that In comparison, the time conclusions of psychoanalysis has only just arrivedseem rather [[conservative]].

One Is psychoanalysis outdated? It certainly appears to be. It is outdated scientifically, in that the [[cognitivism|cognitivist]]-[[neurobiology|neurobiologist]] model of the consistent themes of today’s conservative cultural critique [[human]] [[mind]] has superseded the [[Freudian]] [[model]]; it is that, outdated in our permissive erathe [[psychiatry|psychiatric]] [[clinic]], children lack firm limits where [[treatment|psychoanalytic treatment]] is losing ground to [[drug treatment]] and [[behavioural therapy]]; and prohibitions. This frustrates themit is outdated in [[society]] more broadly, driving them from one excess to another. Only a firm boundary set up by some symbolic authority can guarantee stability and satisfaction – where the satisfaction that comes [[notion]] of violating [[social norms]] which [[repression|repress]] the prohibition. In order to make clear the way negation functions [[individual]]’s [[sexuality|sexual]] [[drive]]s doesn’t hold up in the unconscious, Freud cited the comment one face of his patients made after recounting a dream about an unknown woman: ‘Whoever this woman in my dream is, I know she is today’s [[hedonism]]. But we should not my motherbe too hasty.’ A clear proof, for Freud, Perhaps we should instead insist that the woman was his mother. What better way to characterise the typical patient [[time]] of today than to imagine his reaction to the same dream: ‘Whoever this woman in my dream is, I’m sure she psychoanalysis has something to do with my mother!’only just arrived.

TraditionallyOne of the consistent themes of today’s [[conservative]] [[cultural critique]] is that, in our [[permissiveness|permissive]] era, [[children]] [[lack]] firm [[limit]]s and [[prohibition]]s. This [[frustration|frustrates]] [[them]], psychoanalysis has been expected driving them from one [[excess]] to enable [[another]]. Only a firm boundary set up by some [[symbolic]] [[authority]] can [[guarantee]] [[stability]] and [[satisfaction]] – the patient satisfaction that comes of [[transgression|violating]] the [[prohibition]]. In [[order]] to overcome make clear the way [[negation]] functions in the obstacles preventing [[unconscious]], [[Freud]] cited the comment one of his or her access to normal sexual satisfaction[[patient]]s made after recounting a [[dream]] about an unknown [[woman]]: if you are "Whoever this woman in my dream is, I [[know]] she is not able to get itmy mother." A clear proof, for Freud, visit an analyst and he will help you to lose your inhibitions. Now that we are bombarded from all sides by the injunction woman was his [[mother]]. What better way to ‘Enjoy!’, psychoanalysis should perhaps be regarded differently, as characterise the only discourse in which you are allowed ''not'' typical [[patient]] of today than to imagine his reaction to enjoythe same dream: not ‘not allowed to enjoy’"Whoever this woman in my dream is, but relieved of the pressure I’m sure she has something to enjoy.do with my mother!"

Nowhere is this paradoxical change in Traditionally, [[psychoanalysis]] has been expected to enable the role of psychoanalytic interpretation clearer than in patient to overcome the case of dreamsobstacles preventing his or her access to [[norality|normal]] [[sexuality|sexual]] [[satisfaction]]: if you are not able to get it, visit an [[analyst]] and he will [[help]] you to lose your [[inhibition]]s. The conventional understanding of Freud’s theory of dreams is Now that a dream is we are bombarded from all sides by the phantasmic realisation of some censored unconscious desire[[injunction to Enjoy]]!, psychoanalysis should perhaps be regarded differently, which is as a rule of a sexual nature. At the beginning of only [[discourse]] in which you are allowed ''not''to [[The Interpretation of Dreamsenjoy]]'', Freud provides a detailed interpretation of his own dream about ‘Irma’s injection’. The interpretation is surprisingly reminiscent of an old Soviet joke: ‘Did Rabinovitch win a new car on the state lottery?’ ‘In principle, yes, he did. Only it was not a car but a bicycle‘not allowed to enjoy’, it was not new but old, and he did not win it, it was stolen from him!’ Is a dream the manifestation relieved of the dreamer’s unconscious sexual desire? In principle, yes. Yet in the dream Freud chose pressure to demonstrate his theory of dreams, his desire is neither sexual nor unconscious, and, moreover, it’s not his ownenjoy.

The dream begins with a conversation between Freud and his patient Irma about Nowhere is this [[paradox]]ical [[change]] in the failure role of her treatment because [[psychoanalytic]] [[interpretation]] clearer than in the [[case]] of an infection caused by an injection[[dreams]]. In The conventional [[understanding]] of Freud’s [[theory]] of dreams is that a dream is the course [[fantasy|phantasmic]] realisation of the conversationsome [[censor]]ed [[unconscious]] [[desire]], Freud approaches her and looks deep into her mouth. He which is confronted with the unpleasant sight as a rule of scabs and curly structures like nasal bonesa [[sexuality|sexual]] [[nature]]. At this point, the horror suddenly changes to comedy. Three doctorsbeginning of ''[[The Interpretation of Dreams]]'', friends of Freud, among them one called Otto, appear and begin to enumerate, in ridiculous pseudo-professional jargon, possible (and mutually exclusive) causes provides a detailed interpretation of his own dream about "[[Irma’s infectioninjection]]. If anyone had been to blame" The interpretation is surprisingly reminiscent of an old [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] [[joke]]: "Did [[Rabinovitch]] win a new car on the [[state]] lottery?" "In [[principle]], yes, he did. Only it transpires in the dreamwas not a car but a bicycle, it is Ottowas not new but old, because and he gave Irma the injection: ‘Injections ought did not to be made so thoughtlesslywin it,’ it was stolen from him!" Is a dream the [[manifest]]ation of the doctors concludedreamer’s unconscious [[sexual]] desire? In principle, ‘and probably the syringe had not been cleanyes.’ So, the ‘latent thought’ articulated Yet in the dream Freud [[chose]] to demonstrate his theory of dreams, his desire is neither sexual nor unconscious, but Freud’s fully conscious wish to absolve himself of responsibility for the failure of Irma’s treatmentand, moreover, it's not his own. How does this fit with the thesis that dreams manifest unconscious sexual desires?

A crucial refinement is necessary hereThe dream begins with a conversation between Freud and his [[patient]] [[Irma]] about the failure of her [[treatment]] because of an infection caused by an injection. The unconscious desire which animates In the dream is not merely course of the dream’s latent thoughtconversation, which Freud approaches her and looks deep into her mouth. He is translated into its explicit contentconfronted with the unpleasant [[sight]] of scabs and curly [[structures]] like nasal bones. At this point, but another unconscious wish, which inscribes itself in the dream through the ''[[Traumarbeithorror]]'' (‘suddenly changes to [[dreamcomedy]]. Three doctors, friends of Freud, among them one called Otto, appear and begin to enumerate, in ridiculous pseudo-workprofessional [[jargon]]’, possible (and mutually exclusive)causes of Irma’s infection. If anyone had been to blame, it transpires in the process whereby the latent thought dream, it is distorted into the dream’s explicit form. Here lies Otto, because he gave Irma the paradox of the dream-workinjection: we want "Injections ought not to get rid of a pressing, disturbing thought of which we are fully conscious, be made so we distort itthoughtlessly, translating it into " the hieroglyph of doctors conclude, "and probably the dreamsyringe had not been clean. However" So, it is through this distortion that another, much more fundamental desire encodes itself the '[[latent thought]]' articulated in the dreamis neither sexual nor unconscious, and but Freud’s fully [[conscious]] wish to absolve himself of [[responsibility]] for the failure of Irma’s treatment. How does this desire is fit with the [[thesis]] that dreams manifest [[unconscious and ]] [[sexuality|sexual.]] [[desire]]s?

What A crucial refinement is necessary here. The unconscious desire which animates the ultimate meaning of Freud’s [[dream? In his own analysis, Freud focuses on ]] is not merely the dream-dream’s [[latent thought]], on his ‘superficial’ which is translated into its [[explicit]] [[content]], but another [[unconscious]] [[wish to be blameless in his treatment of Irma. However]], which inscribes itself in the details of his interpretation there are hints of deeper motivations. The dream through the ''[[Traumarbeit]]'' (‘[[dream-encounter with Irma reminds Freud of several other women. The oral examination recalls another patientwork]]’), a governess, who had appeared a ‘picture of youthful beauty’ until he looked the [[process]] whereby the [[latent]] thought is [[distortion|distorted]] into her mouththe dream’s explicit [[form]]. Irma’s position by a window reminds him Here lies the [[paradox]] of a meeting with an ‘intimate woman friend’ of Irma’s the dream-[[work]]: we [[want]] to get rid of whom he ‘had a very high opinion’; thinking about her nowpressing, Freud has ‘every reason to suppose that this other lady, too, was a hysteric’. The scabs and nasal bones remind him disturbing thought of his own use of cocaine to reduce nasal swellingwhich we are fully conscious, and of a female patient whoso we distort it, following his example, had developed an ‘extensive necrosis translating it into the [[hieroglyph]] of the nasal mucous membrane’dream. His consultation with one of the doctors brings to mind an occasion on which Freud’s treatment of a woman patient gave rise to a ‘severe toxic state’ However, to which she subsequently ‘succumbed’; the patient had the same name as his eldest daughterit is through this [[distortion]] that another, Mathilde. The unconscious much more fundamental [[desire of ]] encodes itself in the dream , and this desire is Freud’s wish to be the ‘primordial father’ who possesses all the women Irma embodies in the dreamunconscious and sexual.

What is the ultimate meaning of Freud’s dream? In his own [[analysis]], Freud focuses on the dream-thought, on his 'superficial' [[wish]] to be blameless in his [[treatment]] of [[Irma]]. However, in the details of his [[interpretation]] there are hints of deeper motivations. The dream presents -[[encounter]] with Irma reminds Freud of several other women. The [[oral]] examination recalls another [[patient]], a governess, who had appeared a 'picture of youthful beauty' until he looked into her mouth. Irma’s [[position]] by a window reminds him of a further enigma: meeting with an 'intimate woman friend'whoseof Irma’s of whom he 'had a very high opinion'; [[thinking]] about her now, Freud has ' desire does it manifest? Recent commentaries clearly establish every [[reason]] to suppose that the true motivation behind the dream this other lady, too, was Freud’s desire a [[hysteric]]'. The scabs and nasal bones remind him of his own use of [[cocaine]] to absolve Fliessreduce nasal swelling, and of a [[female]] patient who, following his close friend and collaboratorexample, had developed an 'extensive necrosis of responsibility and guiltthe nasal mucous membrane'. It was Fliess who botched Irma’s nose operation, and His consultation with one of the dream’s desire is not doctors brings to exculpate mind an occasion on which Freud himself, but his friend, who was's treatment of a woman patient gave rise to a 'severe toxic state', at this point, Freud’s ‘subject supposed to know’, which she subsequently 'succumbed'; the patient had the object of same [[name]] as his transferenceeldest daughter, [[Mathilde]]. The [[unconscious]] [[desire]] of the [[dream dramatises his ]] is Freud’s [[wish ]] to show that Fliess wasn’t responsible for be the 'primordial father' who possesses all the medical failure, that he wasn’t lacking [[women]] [[Irma]] embodies in knowledge. The the [[dream does manifest Freud’s desire – but only insofar as his desire is already the Other’s (Fliess’s) desire]].

Why do we However, the dreampresents a further enigma: ''whose'' desire does it [[manifest]]? Freud’s answer is deceptively simple: Recent commentaries clearly establish that the ultimate function of [[true]] motivation behind the dream is was Freud's desire to enable the dreamer to stay asleep. This is usually interpreted as bearing on the kinds of dream we have when some external disturbance – noiseabsolve [[Fliess]], for example – threatens to wake us. In such a situationhis close friend and collaborator, the sleeper immediately begins to imagine a situation which incorporates this external stimulus of [[responsibility]] and thereby is able to continue sleeping for a while longer; when the external stimulus becomes too strong, he finally wakes up. Are things really so straightforward? In another famous example from ''[[The Interpretation of Dreamsguilt]]. It was Fliess who botched Irma''s nose operation, an exhausted father, whose young son has just died, falls asleep and dreams that the child dream's desire is standing by not to exculpate Freud himself, but his bed in flamesfriend, whispering the horrifying reproach: ‘Fatherwho was, can’t you see I’m burning?’ Soon afterwardsat this point, the father wakes Freud’s '[[subject supposed to discover that a fallen candle has set fire to his dead son’s shroud. He had smelled the smoke while asleepknow]]', and incorporated the image [[object]] of his burning son into his [[transference]]. The dream to prolong dramatises his sleep. Had the father woken up because the external stimulus became too strong wish to be contained within the dream-scenario? Or was it show that Fliess wasn't [[responsible]] for the obversemedical failure, that the father constructed the he wasn’t [[lacking]] in [[knowledge]]. The dream in order to prolong does manifest Freud’s desire – but only insofar as his sleep, but what he encountered in desire is already the dream was much more unbearable even than external reality, so that he woke up to escape into that reality[[Other]]'s (Fliess’s) [[desire]].

In both dreams, there Why do we dream? Freud’s answer is a traumatic encounter (deceptively simple: the sight ultimate function of Irma’s throat, the vision dream is to enable the dreamer to stay asleep. This is usually [[interpreted]] as bearing on the kinds of dream we have when some [[external]] [[disturbance]] – noise, for example – threatens to wake us. In such a [[situation]], the burning son)sleeper immediately begins to imagine a situation which incorporates this external stimulus and thereby is able to continue sleeping for a while longer; but in when the second dreamexternal stimulus becomes too strong, the dreamer he finally wakes at this pointup. Are things really so straightforward? In another famous example from ''[[The Interpretation of Dreams]]'', an exhausted [[father]], whose young son has just died, while falls asleep and dreams that the [[child]] is standing by his bed in flames, whispering the firsthorrifying reproach: "[[Father, can’t you see I’m burning?]]" Soon afterwards, the horror gives way father wakes to discover that a fallen candle has set fire to his dead son’s shroud. He had smelled the smoke while asleep, and incorporated the arrival [[image]] of his burning son into his dream to prolong his sleep. Had the doctors. The parallel offers us father woken up because the key external stimulus became too strong to understanding Freud’s theory of dreams. Just as be contained within the father’s awakening from dream-scenario? Or was it the second dream has obverse, that the same function as father constructed the sudden change of tone dream in order to prolong his sleep, but what he encountered in the firstdream was much more unbearable even than [[external reality]], so our ordinary that he woke up to escape into that [[reality enables us to evade an encounter with true trauma]].

Adorno said that the Nazi motto ‘DeutschlandIn both dreams, erwache!’ actually meant its opposite: if you responded to this call, you could continue to sleep and dream there is a [[traumatic encounter]] (i.e. to avoid engagement with the real sight of social antagonism). In Irma's throat, the first stanza [[vision]] of Primo Levi’s poem ‘Reveille’ the concentration camp survivor recalls being burning son); but in the campsecond dream, asleepthe dreamer wakes at this point, dreaming intense dreams about returning home, eating, telling his relatives his story, when, suddenly, he is woken up by while in the Polish kapo’s command ‘Wstawac!’ (‘Get up!’). In the second stanzafirst, he is at home after the war, well fed, having told his story [[horror]] gives way to his family, when, suddenly, he imagines hearing again the shout, ‘Wstawac!’ arrival of the doctors. The reversal parallel offers us the key to understanding Freud’s theory of dreams. Just as the relationship between dream and reality father’s awakening from the first stanza to the second is crucial. Their content is formally dream has the same – function as the pleasant domestic scene is interrupted by the injunction ‘Get up!’ – but sudden change of tone in the first, the dream is cruelly interrupted by the wake-up call, while in the second, so our ordinary [[reality is interrupted by the imagined command. We might imagine the second example from The '']] enables us to evade an encounter with true [[Interpretation of Dreamstrauma]]'' as belonging to the Holocaust survivor who, unable to save his son from the crematorium, is haunted afterwards by his reproach: ‘Vater, siehst du nicht dass ich verbrenne?’.

[[Adorno]] said that the [[Nazi]] motto "Deutschland, erwache!" actually meant its opposite: if you responded to this call, you could continue to [[sleep]] and dream (i.e. to avoid engagement with the [[real]] of [[social antagonism]]). In the first stanza of [[Primo Levi]]’s [[poetry|poem]] "[[Reveille]]" the [[concentration camp]] survivor recalls being in the camp, asleep, dreaming intense dreams about returning home, eating, telling his relatives his story, when, suddenly, he is woken up by the [[Polish]] kapo’s command "Wstawac!" ("Get up!"). In the second stanza, he is at home after the [[war]], well fed, having told his story to his [[family]], when, suddenly, he imagines hearing again the shout, "Wstawac!" The [[reversal]] of the [[relationship]] between [[dream]] and [[reality]] from the first stanza to the second is crucial. Their content is formally the same – the pleasant domestic [[scene]] is interrupted by the [[injunction]] ‘Get up!’ – but in the first, the dream is cruelly interrupted by the wake-up call, while in the second, reality is interrupted by the imagined command. We might imagine the second example from The ''[[Interpretation of Dreams]]'' as belonging to the [[Holocaust]] survivor who, unable to save his son from the crematorium, is haunted afterwards by his reproach: "Vater, siehst du nicht dass ich verbrenne?" In our ‘society "[[society of the spectacle’spectacle]]", in which what we [[experience ]] as everyday reality more and more takes the form of the [[lie ]] made real, Freud’s [[Freud]]’s insights show their true [[value]]. Consider the interactive computer [[games ]] some of us play compulsively[[compulsive]]ly, games which enable a [[neurotic ]] weakling to adopt the [[screen ]] persona of a macho [[aggressivity|aggressor]], beating up other [[men ]] and [[violence|violently ]] enjoying [[women]]. It’s all too easy to assume that this weakling takes refuge in [[cyberspace ]] in order to escape from a dull, [[impotence|impotent ]] [[reality]]. But perhaps the games are more telling than that. What if, in playing them, I articulate the [[perversion|perverse ]] core of my [[personality ]] which, because of [[ethics|ethico]]-[[social norms|social constraints]], I am not able to act out in real [[life]]? Isn’t my [[virtual ]] persona in a way ‘more "[[more real than reality’reality]]"? Isn’t it precisely because I am aware that this is ‘just 'just a game’ [[game]]' that in it I can do what I would never be able to in the real [[world]]? In this precise sense, as [[Lacan ]] put it, [[the Truth has the structure of a fiction]]: what appears in the guise of dreaming, or even daydreaming, is sometimes the [[truth ]] on whose [[repression ]] [[social reality ]] itself is founded. Therein resides the ultimate lesson of ''[[The Interpretation of Dreams]]'': [[reality ]] is for those who cannot sustain the [[dream]]. ==Source==* [[Freud Lives!]] ''[[London]] Review of Books''. Volume. 28 [[Number]] 10. May 25, 2006. <http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n10/zize01_.html>