Sunday, November 07, 2010

Whoops I Meant Freud . . . A Response

I too find Freud to be, well, a fraud. Ever since we reviewed the story "The Sandman" I have found the loss of eyes to be within so much of the media, literature, television, and more that we are exposed to on a daily basis. Is EVERYONE trying to address the issue of loss of sexual organs through the metaphor of eyes?

I find this hard to believe.

How can the loss of male reproductive organs, however important they may be the the well-being of the world, be the center of so many metaphors? One could speculate that Freud had wisdom beyond the average man, and he is able to just understand the representations of the mind by interpreting them through his infinite psychological wisdom. The average man only subconsciously represents these things through images such as eyes, wombs, and more.

Yet through Freud our world boils down to sex, sexual desires, and sexual fears. Is that ALL that humankind is concerned with? Reproduction and pleasure are, of course, important but I would argue that people are concerned with far more things than just this. Not EVERY part of our conscience or sub-conscience deals with that which Freud boils our world down to.

Nathan, you are right. Freud is a fraud.

1 comment:

Daniel Ruwe said...

I agree. I have no idea why we even spend (in a variety of classes) any time at all studying Freud, but we do. We learned about him in Abnormal Psychology, Joyce/Faulkner, here, tons of places. But he was wrong about pretty much everything, and while he may have invented psychology, he was wrong about everything there. I can't help but think academia's obsession with Freud is mostly due to inertia. We've always studied him, so let's just keep on doing so. (Same deal with Marx). Freud theories on horror, like most of his other theories, are pretty stupid.