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.
It is a pleasure and an honor to have been asked to discuss Cláudio Eizirik's very deep and comprehensive paper on the question of the father. It is rather difficult to discuss a work when one is mostly in agreement with it, so I will simply make a few comments and raise some questions.
I was charmed by Eizirik's quotations from the work of the poet Carlos Drummond de Andrade. Eizirik's culture and love for literature touch me a lot and remind me, obviously, of Freud, a prodigious reader himself, for whom the poets knew how to speak about the psyche better than we technicians of analysis do. I recall that the novel Freud preferred to all others was The Brothers Karamazov (Dostoyevsky 1880), whose theme is three parricides in thought and one parricide in action.
I will add only one detail to the author's detour through mythology and tales. I have a question: Eizirik refers to the Old and the New Testaments, and says that the New Testament
… introduces a different form of father figure to remedy the harsh and demanding God of Abraham…. The change is quite radical: instead of demanding that fathers sacrifice sons to prove their loyalty to him, God the father, the God of the New Testament, actually sacrifices his own son for the sake of humankind. [2015, p. 340]
For me, this is a very profound and crucial statement. My question is this: could we go as far as to say, as Freud does in Moses and Monotheism (1939),