Psychoanalysis and Russian Studies

[George Mitrevski]

>>> Daniel Rancour-Laferriere <darancourlaferriere at COMCAST.NET> 03/22/06
4:02  >>>

>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.

Fortunately, thanks to academic freedom, tenure, etc., there is nothing
to prevent a person with  "a degree in literature" from studying other
fields in the process of literary study. Interdisciplinary effort is not
a complete waste. What is a waste is to study a figment of someone's
imagination "as if" the character is a real person with a real body
living in the real world.  Raskolnikov did not have a psyche because
figments of people's imaginations do not have psychies, at least not the
kind that can be analyzed by a practicing psychologist. Also, to do any
kind of justice to a psychoanalytic study of a character (real of
fictional), wouldn't one need to have some practical experience in the
field, at least an advanced degree in the field and some clinical
practice with real individuals? Are you trying to convince me that the
typical student or scholar  of Russian Literature has enough practical 
experience in the field to do psychoanalysis? A student turns in a paper
to me that is a psychoanalysis of some literary character. Wouldn't it
be appropriate for me to ask: "Excuse me, but, do you have a degree and
practical experience in psychoanalysis? If not, then how did you come up
with the notion that character X suffers from Y and Z?" And let's assume
for a moment that the student is qualified to do all this. I, not being
qualified in psychoanalysis, have absolutely no clue if the findings in
the student's paper are valid or not. In such a situation I, too, would
"not even consider the matter further." 

My understanding is that in a psychoanalytic session the psychologist
needs to be face to face with the individual psychoanalyzed (I'm talking
about the numerous 50 minute sessions). So, how have  these "practicing
clinical analysts" psychoanalyzed Raskolnikov, I wonder. 

As to Roman Jakobson, he published both in literary and in linguistics
publications. I'm wondering, does the Journal of the American
Psychiatric Association publish articles by literary scholars that are
based on the psychoanalytic study of fictional characters? Is research
on fictional characters considered valid in their profession? Is a
literary scholar who has written several volumes on psychoanalytic
analysis of fictional characters actually qualified to get a license to
practice psychotherapy? If not, then how can I trust that his/her
psychoanalysis of a character (fictional or real) is valid? 

George.

Foreign Languages                 tel. 334-844-6376
6030 Haley Center                  fax. 334-844-6378
Auburn University
Auburn, AL 36849
home: www.auburn.edu/~mitrege

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 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/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------