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.
Derek Russell Davis's Scenes of Madness is a fascinating and original book. It is rare enough to find an expert in a single field; when a writer is erudite in two disparate areas, it is indeed an occasion for celebration.
Davis asks the question, “What light do the discoveries of playwrights throw on the madness observed in family, friends, neighbours and acquaintances as well as patients, not only in the consulting room, but also in their everyday lives?” (p. 8). To answer this question, he has assembled many diverse instances of madness from plays covering a wide range of history.
The author believes that one can learn as much about madness at the theater as from any psychiatry book, but what is learned is different. Plays evoke feelings as well as intellectual curiosity about madness, but say little about defense mechanisms. Similarly, differences in biological chemistry have little or no theatrical relevance. Psychoanalysis assumes that behavior is always an attempt at adaptation. In contrast, madness dramatized in plays can be seen as attempts to resolve interpersonal problems. Behavior can be viewed as sane or mad in accordance with the part it plays in exchanges between two people or within a system of relationships.
Davis proves his point well in his discussion of madness in the classics. According to him, the psychoanalytic view of the Oedipus complex casts a spotlight on only one aspect of Sophocles' play. In his view, the killing of Laius can be viewed as the result of interaction between him and Oedipus in the context of expectations fostered in them by others. Thus the behavior of each is explained by interpersonal as well as intrapsychic processes. Similarly, Othello portrays envy, betrayal, jealousy, and murder arising out of relationships between men and women, without resorting to any hidden constitutional factors. Hamlet illustrates