Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 09:01:05 GMT From: Chris Burford <cburford-AT-gn.apc.org> Subject: M-PSY: "The Unconscious" I will have a go at taking up Jon's post on the Unconscious myself. Although from one point of view many may regard the subject as academic and vague, Jon makes a link - desire - which has the most important strategic and tactical implications for marxism. The excuse for capitalism is that the abundance of commodities it brings, is better at meeting the desire of individual purchasers, whether conscious or unconscious, whether of the stomach or the imagination, it does not matter. And there seems to be no slowing of the global triumph of commodity exchange. Some comments on the concept of the "Unconscious" 1. I tend to see this as a hypostatised entity, which is a way of descibing a process, or processes rather than things. It unfortunately is a noun, rather than a verb. It tends to imply a rather static but powerful Thing which influences the resulting picture through its power. I prefer verbs. 2. I see it as analogous to Freud's conceptual division into Id, Ego and Superego. These categories seem all the more rigid in English translation, while at least in the German original it was "Das Es" and "Das Ich". BTW I always get muddled about the terms and the chronology of Freud's different theories. Which is the "topographical" model? 3. What makes sense to me now, concretely and senusously, about the main meaning of "the unconscious" is that of which I am not currently conscious. For example a moment ago I was unconscious of a feeling of discomfort in the small of my back. I am now conscious of it. But even before, it may have contributed just that little to a certain sense of urgency and impatience that is driving this post hopefully to a coherent and speedy conclusion, but may also, knowing my weaknesses, drive me to be over inclusive. And that latter may be as a result of various feelings of uncertainty about myself in relation to other people, which have been shaped by a number of features, currently mercifully forgotten, rather than repressed, but also a few, which in deeper psychotherapy over months and years, I might face up to and recognise were unconscious when I wrote this letter, at this moment. 4. It is now part of modern Western culture to identify, measure and attempt to treat "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder". It is routinely documented now, how "flashbacks" or nightmares reminiscent of the traumatic situation keep on breaking through the individual's attempt to rebuild their life. In this respect through the public media, and sounds bites, there is a mass awareness and acceptance of "the unconscious". Last month hundreds of thousands marched through Brussels in protest at the inadequacy of the bourgeois state in protecting children from sexual and physical trauma. Many of those who marched, may have had experiences, hopefully less severe, but painful enough in their minds, in the twilight between conciousness and unconsciousness. 5. I suppose I am saying that material changes in the means of communication are shifting the concept of a division between "the unconscious" on the one hand and the rational consciousness of civilised bourgeois Viennese man (sic). There is more of a continuum. The unconscious is no longer an exciting preserve of women, blacks, Picasso, DH Lawrence. It is now the mystified preserve of porn movies and the internet. 6. Jon raises the interesting point of how much USA "ego" psychology is still reflecting this division between "the Id" and "the Ego" or it has moved on from there. And how much Lacan and his followers are reacting against "Ego Psychology" for pertinent reasons. Before I nervously finger my copy of "Lacan for Beginners" again, could I request people to help with some of these technical point about Freud, his followers and his detractors, above all with explanations which help to bridge the gap between the specialist and the lay person? How do others see this? Chris Burford London. __________________ From: Jon Beasley-Murray <jpb8-AT-acpub.duke.edu> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 14:56:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: M-I:*The* Unconscious; was Marxists on desire Well, Carrol and I may have to agree to disagree on this, as he seems quite set in his refusal of the concept of the unconscious, and I (as he noted) am quite set in my acceptance that there is such a thing as the unconscious (if willing to grant a wide variety of views on what it is and how it works). [Maybe this might be a topic to cross-post to marxism-psych, or at least to sound out the thoughts of folk over there, by the way.] To state my position (and not to appear "illicit"), I think that reference to the unconscious is reference to the fact that we are not purely rational beings (for better or for worse) and that some (at least) of what we do is determined by forces beyond our control that are *also* to some extent at least an integral part of us (ie. are not merely external contstraints). I think Freud is persuasive (and a very easy read, by the way) in his demonstrations of the impact of the unconscious--primarily, for him, visible in dreams, jokes and "slips." "The ego is not master in his own house." Fair enough, I say. I do, however, tend to part company with much of psychoanalysis from thereon, and especially find much recent psychoanalytic theory dry and disabling. Anyhow, all this just to explicate the "of course" to which Carroll took exception. I think Marxist theories (indeed any liberatory praxis) have to take account of the unconscious (and thus desire) even if their aim is to subdue it. I think Justin well exemplifies the position that the socialist project is to produce a rational management and understanding of the world, and that this necessarily involves a subjugation of the unconscious--"Where Id was, there Ego shall be." I happen to be less comfortable with this position (and would question its viability, for a start), which is also the project of ego-psychology, and yet don't want to fall into the various Lacanian mystifications that are also premised upon a rejection of such ego-psychology. Anyway, hope all this clarifies where I'm coming from, at least. Take care Jon Jon Beasley-Murray Literature Program Duke University jpb8-AT-acpub.duke.edu http://jefferson.village.virginia.edu/~spoons --- from list marxism-psych-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list marxism-psych-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005