Full text unavailable

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.

IRP 10:246-248 (1983)

The Literary Use of the Psychoanalytic Process: By Meredith Anne Skura. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 1981. Pp. 280.

Author: Murray Cox

Abstract

It will not be news to readers of the International Review that previous experience influences current perceptions. For this reason I could not review this book with impartiality, because I had previously read an article1 by the author in which she had written:

I hope to avoid the familiar dichotomy between analyst's and critic's explanations—or between 'unconscious' and 'conscious' meaning. 'Meaning is an affair of consciousness, ' says critic E. D. Hirsch, while the analyst Ferenczi claims that the conscious meaning cannot be understood until the unconscious 'depths are plumbed'. I think, though, that what happens as we look at Cymbeline, even more clearly than with the other plays, is that we can see the terms conscious and unconscious as a misleading polarity. What we really experience instead of either of these extremes is a range of different ways of being aware.

A passage such as this could not help inducing a favourably receptive state of mind in which to read a book with a view to reviewing it. Nevertheless, I am sure the positive bias I experience is justified. The book deals with an important topic in such a way that the reader is almost compelled to explore further.

It should be noted that the title is not 'The Psychoanalytic Use of the Literary Process'. Though these are cognate fields and there are many books on this vast inter-disciplinary matrix where literature and psychoanalysis meet. But, as far as I know, there are no other books on the precise theme which Meredith Skura has tackled.

A rapid glance at the chapter headings gives a good idea of the scope of the book. Here they are:

1LITERATURE, PSYCHOANALYSIS, AND THE PSYCHOANALYTICPROCESSThe Psychoanalytic Process: Models for Criticism Psychoanalysis: Background of the Models
2LITERATURE AS CASE HISTORY: CONTENTMetapsychology and the Case of Everyman Case History or Fantasy: Literal or Figurative? The Analyts's Figures and the Poet's
3LITERATURE AS FANTASY: PSYCHIC FUNCTIONDaydreams: Wish

IRP 10:246-248 (1983)

The Literary Use of the Psychoanalytic Process: By Meredith Anne Skura. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 1981. Pp. 280.

Author: Murray Cox

Abstract

I hope to avoid the familiar dichotomy between analyst's and critic's explanations—or between 'unconscious' and 'conscious' meaning. 'Meaning is an affair of consciousness, ' says critic E. D. Hirsch, while the analyst Ferenczi claims that the conscious meaning cannot be understood until the unconscious 'depths are plumbed'. I think, though, that what happens as we look at Cymbeline, even more clearly than with the other plays, is that we can see the terms conscious and unconscious as a misleading polarity. What we really experience instead of either of these extremes is a range of different ways of being aware.

A rapid glance at the chapter headings gives a good idea of the scope of the book. Here they are:

1LITERATURE, PSYCHOANALYSIS, AND THE PSYCHOANALYTICPROCESSThe Psychoanalytic Process: Models for Criticism Psychoanalysis: Background of the Models
2LITERATURE AS CASE HISTORY: CONTENTMetapsychology and the Case of Everyman Case History or Fantasy: Literal or Figurative? The Analyts's Figures and the Poet's
3LITERATURE AS FANTASY: PSYCHIC FUNCTIONDaydreams: Wish