You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The subtitle of this collection of new essays on Shakespeare, taken from Theseus’s speech about the nature of imagination in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, refers to the traditional dichotomy of science (cool reason) and art (seething emotion) and indicates that the book seeks to marry the two, as does Bottom himself. Psychoanalysis itself is these days generally considered an art–science so it is a fitting umbrella under which to gather a variety of psychoanalytically oriented essays, although not a new approach, any more than it is only “recent conversations” in both Shakespeare studies and psychoanalytic literature that “concern identity” (8). Identity – the peculiarity of human nature in its individual and group manifestations – has always been the focus and rationale behind both psychoanalysis and literature, and the reason for literature’s existence and appeal to readers. Packed theatres show no signs of interest abating, and long may the conversations continue.
Papers published here were presented at a conference in the early stages of the Covid-19 pandemic. The event was brought to an abrupt conclusion when the co-organiser Christian A. Smith (to whom the volume is dedicated) called out “Can’t you see the world is burning?” The editors have noted how the pandemic became a relevant context for structuring the volume according to themes such as tombs, ghosts, sacrifice, and mourning. It also highlights the perennial question of the usefulness of psychoanalysis. Is it just a luxury means for the neurotic bourgeoisie to evacuate their anxieties, or does it have any constructive role in the wider world? Perhaps the world has always been burning and the richer world turned a blind eye, but trauma has always been part of the human condition. Other than entertainment value, of what use is Shakespeare to psychoanalysis and the world at large? Is it possible to have a genuinely interdisciplinary dialogue about the world’s or the individual’s states of mind?
The editors wish