Psychoanalysis and Russian Studies

Wed Mar 22 22:02:28 UTC 2006

22 March 06

Dear George Mitrevski,
I think your "beef with psychoanalytic approaches to literature" 
constitutes evidence of "negativity" to psychoanalysis which Inna Caron 
says she did not find (see below).  More specifically, however, Inna 
Caron says:

>I have not witnessed any Russian/Slavic studies professor silence a
>student mid-sentence if the latter ventured into psychoanalysis
>
Well, I have - as I reported in 1989 on page 17 of the _Russian 
Literature & Psychoanalysis_ volume.  I was the student, the university 
was not located in California, and the professor (whom I shall not name) 
declared, "That's preposterous," when I ventured a psychoanalytic 
interpretation in the classroom.  End of discussion.  The professor 
would not even consider the matter further.  So this is in addition to 
the example provided by Robert Chandler.

That was many years ago, when I was a graduate student.  After that, it 
worked the other way.  I have had graduate students and even 
fellow-faculty members denounce my psychoanalytic interpretations to the 
administration of a certain university, and in one case I almost lost my 
job.  Fortunately, I had a very good lawyer, many people became involved 
inside and outside the university, and academic freedom won the day.  As 
for trying to publish psychoanalytic interpretations of Russian 
literature and culture, there are many stories there, too, such as my 
failed attempt to get an essay (in part) on Eugene Onegin's homoerotic 
proclivities (as perceived in Tat'iana's dream) into the journal 
_Russian Review_ back in the 1980s (I later placed the article 
elsewhere, both in English and in Russian).  Correct me if I am wrong, 
but nowadays, I understand, Onegin's place in the gay world is taken for 
granted.

But to return to Mitrevski's "beef."  The character in question is 
Raskolnikov.  The "ridiculous" psychoanalysis was apparently performed 
by someone "with a degree in literature."  But what is there to prevent 
a person with "a degree in literature" from studying other fields in the 
process of literary study?  Is interdisciplinary effort a complete waste 
of time?  Think of Roman Jakobson, who combined literary and linguistic 
analysis with such fruitful results.  In any case, both literary 
scholars AND practicing clinical analysts have psychoanalyzed 
Raskolnikov (see the bibliography in the above-mentioned volume, pp. 
20-37).  Dostoevsky offers such deep insight into Raskolnikov's psyche 
that psychoanalysis cannot but apply.

The major problem with psychoanalysis today is not that it does not 
"apply" outside of the clinical context, but that it is becoming 
increasingly irrelevant IN the clinic.  It is way too expensive (about 
$100-$175 per 50-minute session last I heard) for ordinary people, it is 
no more effective than other forms of talk therapy, and it is quite 
INeffective by comparison with drugs in the treatment of certain 
disorders such as schizophrenia or bipolar illness.  As I argue in an 
edited volume _Self-Analysis in Literary Study_ (NYU Press, 1994), 
insight into one's unconscious motives and conflicts can be very 
interesting intellectually, but such insight does not necessarily cure.  
By the way, all of the contributors to that volume but me were English 
professors.

Shall we "exhume" further, as Inna Caron says?  I'm game.  But I'll be 
equally happy to drop the subject.

Regards to the list,

Daniel Rancour-Laferriere

PS.  I apologize to Mark Konecny for giving a gratuitously satirical 
response to his 21 March message, which was posted in good faith.

George Mitrevski wrote:

>Here is my beef with psychoanalytic approaches to literature. 
>Many years ago as a graduate student I recall reading a psychoanalytic study of a character in a Russian novel, perhaps Raskolnikov. How ridiculous, I thought, to be reading a psychoanalytic study of the figment of someone's imagination, by a person with a degree in literature! What next?  A medical analysis of the narrator's diseased liver in "Notes from the Underground"? By a literary scholar? 
>
>George.
>
>Foreign Languages                 tel. 334-844-6376
>6030 Haley Center                  fax. 334-844-6378
>Auburn University
>Auburn, AL 36849
>home: www.auburn.edu/~mitrege
>
>
>  
>
>>>>Daniel Rancour-Laferriere <darancourlaferriere at COMCAST.NET> 03/21/06 2:42  >>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>Dear Federica,
>Sounds interesting.  But in what sense is the book "psychoanalytical" if 
>it is titled "Semiotika bezumiia"?  What psychoanalytic concepts are 
>employed?  Please describe the contents.
>
>Thanks,
>Daniel RL
>
>Federica wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Dear Inna,
>>Dear Daniel,
>>did you hear about the book 
>>
>>Semiotika bezumija, Moskva: Evropa, 2005g., edited by Nora Buhks?
>>
>>The articles collected in this book develop a psychoanalytical approach to
>>the analysis of Russian lit. and culture. 
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Federica
>>Paris IV
>>
>>-----Message d'origine-----
>>De : Slavic & East European Languages and Literature list
>>[mailto:SEELANGS at LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU] De la part de Daniel Rancour-Laferriere
>>Envoyé : sabato 18 marzo 2006 9.35
>>À : SEELANGS at LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU 
>>Objet : [OBORONA-SPAM] [SEELANGS] Psychoanalysis and Russian Studies
>>
>>18 March 2006
>>
>>Dear Inna Caron,
>>Can you really have written the following words?
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I have to say, I did not notice any negativity surrounding
>>>psychoanalytical approach in Russian literary studies.
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Where have you been?  If it's not a secret, please tell me, so I can go 
>>there too (although I would miss my sunny California)...
>>
>>Seriously.  On the traditional, well-entrenched hostility toward 
>>psychoanalysis in the Russian field, see my survey in the volume I 
>>edited, _Russian Literature and Psychoanalysis_ (Amsterdam: John 
>>Benjamins Publishing Company, 1989, pp. 1-38).  For the Russian version, 
>>see my _Russkaia literatura i psikhoanaliz_ (Moscow: Ladomir, 2004, pp. 
>>128-160).
>>
>>I could tell some stories from as far back as thirty-five years ago.  
>>But no, not yet.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Daniel Rancour-Laferriere
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
>> options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
>>                   http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/ 
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
>> options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
>>                   http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/ 
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
>  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
>                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/ 
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------