{"title":"Antigone, the political and the ethics of psychoanalysis","authors":"M. Leonard","doi":"10.1017/S0068673500000985","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Freudian engagement with the classical world represents one of the most important and intriguing episodes in the ongoing dialogue between antiquity and modernity. That Freud returned to antiquity to formulate his revolutionary theories of the human mind should strike classicists and psychoanalysts alike as a fascinating enigma. And yet classicists have to a large extent given short shrift to this issue. They have not only shown themselves indifferent to the question of why Freud takes the ancient world as the starting-point for his examination of modern man, they have also, by and large, rejected psychoanalysis as a methodological tool for providing insights into the classical world. Even those classicists who are most open to the benefits of contemporary theory have largely isolated psychoanalysis as a uniquely inappropriate methodology for understanding antiquity. So, for instance, those classicists who display an interest in the complex series of discourses and practices which surround the construction of the ancient self have explicitly distanced their analyses from the insights of psychoanalysis. Thus in Christopher Gill's 500-page work on ‘Personality’ in Greek culture, Freud gets a mere three perfunctory citations.","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"49 1","pages":"130-154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0068673500000985","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Classical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068673500000985","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
The Freudian engagement with the classical world represents one of the most important and intriguing episodes in the ongoing dialogue between antiquity and modernity. That Freud returned to antiquity to formulate his revolutionary theories of the human mind should strike classicists and psychoanalysts alike as a fascinating enigma. And yet classicists have to a large extent given short shrift to this issue. They have not only shown themselves indifferent to the question of why Freud takes the ancient world as the starting-point for his examination of modern man, they have also, by and large, rejected psychoanalysis as a methodological tool for providing insights into the classical world. Even those classicists who are most open to the benefits of contemporary theory have largely isolated psychoanalysis as a uniquely inappropriate methodology for understanding antiquity. So, for instance, those classicists who display an interest in the complex series of discourses and practices which surround the construction of the ancient self have explicitly distanced their analyses from the insights of psychoanalysis. Thus in Christopher Gill's 500-page work on ‘Personality’ in Greek culture, Freud gets a mere three perfunctory citations.
弗洛伊德与古典世界的接触代表了古代与现代之间正在进行的对话中最重要和最有趣的情节之一。弗洛伊德回到古代,形成了他关于人类心灵的革命性理论,这应该会让古典主义者和精神分析学家都觉得是一个迷人的谜。然而,古典主义者在很大程度上对这个问题置之不理。他们不仅表现出对弗洛伊德为什么把古代世界作为他研究现代人的起点的问题漠不关心,而且总的来说,他们也拒绝把精神分析作为一种提供对古典世界的洞察的方法论工具。即使是那些对当代理论的好处持最开放态度的古典主义者,也在很大程度上把精神分析作为一种独特的不合适的方法来理解古代。因此,例如,那些对围绕古代自我构建的一系列复杂的话语和实践表现出兴趣的古典主义者,已经明确地将他们的分析与精神分析的见解拉开了距离。因此,在克里斯托弗•吉尔(Christopher Gill)长达500页的著作《希腊文化中的人格》(Personality in Greek culture)中,弗洛伊德仅被敷衍地引用了三次。