回应方和亨利

IF 0.4 Q1 HISTORY
E. Zaretsky
{"title":"回应方和亨利","authors":"E. Zaretsky","doi":"10.1086/699687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The 1970s encounter between feminism and psychoanalysis was a turning point in the history of the left. On the surface, Freud, who until then had been increasingly drawn on for revolutionary purposes, was discredited as a proponent of male supremacy and innate aggression. Thereafter, feminism effectively replaced psychoanalysis as a “folk psychology,” that is, an everyday ethic and popular hermeneutic. At a deeper level, the encounter presaged a transformation in the character of the left—from a movement that aimed at a revolution in economic life to one that sought transformation of personal life and identity. In his 2015 Political Freud, Eli Zaretsky limned the outlines of this 50-year-old mutation, identifying both its costs and its benefits. In their CHS review essay (spring 2018), Benjamin Fong and Phillip Henry argued that Zaretsky had overstated the costs and undervalued the benefits. In this article, Zaretsky responds.","PeriodicalId":43410,"journal":{"name":"Critical Historical Studies","volume":"5 1","pages":"311 - 323"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/699687","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Response to Fong and Henry\",\"authors\":\"E. Zaretsky\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/699687\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The 1970s encounter between feminism and psychoanalysis was a turning point in the history of the left. On the surface, Freud, who until then had been increasingly drawn on for revolutionary purposes, was discredited as a proponent of male supremacy and innate aggression. Thereafter, feminism effectively replaced psychoanalysis as a “folk psychology,” that is, an everyday ethic and popular hermeneutic. At a deeper level, the encounter presaged a transformation in the character of the left—from a movement that aimed at a revolution in economic life to one that sought transformation of personal life and identity. In his 2015 Political Freud, Eli Zaretsky limned the outlines of this 50-year-old mutation, identifying both its costs and its benefits. In their CHS review essay (spring 2018), Benjamin Fong and Phillip Henry argued that Zaretsky had overstated the costs and undervalued the benefits. In this article, Zaretsky responds.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43410,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Historical Studies\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"311 - 323\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/699687\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Historical Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/699687\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Historical Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/699687","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

20世纪70年代女性主义和精神分析的相遇是左派历史上的一个转折点。从表面上看,弗洛伊德在那之前一直被越来越多地用于革命目的,但他作为男性至上主义和先天侵略的支持者却声名狼藉。此后,女性主义有效地取代了精神分析,成为一种“民间心理学”,即一种日常伦理和大众解释学。在更深的层面上,这次相遇预示着左派性格的转变——从一场旨在经济生活革命的运动,到一场寻求个人生活和身份转变的运动。在2015年出版的《政治弗洛伊德》(Political Freud)一书中,伊莱·扎雷茨基(Eli Zaretsky)勾勒出了这种50年前的突变的轮廓,确定了它的成本和收益。本杰明·方(Benjamin Fong)和菲利普·亨利(Phillip Henry)在他们的CHS评论文章(2018年春季)中认为,Zaretsky夸大了成本,低估了收益。在本文中,Zaretsky对此做出了回应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Response to Fong and Henry
The 1970s encounter between feminism and psychoanalysis was a turning point in the history of the left. On the surface, Freud, who until then had been increasingly drawn on for revolutionary purposes, was discredited as a proponent of male supremacy and innate aggression. Thereafter, feminism effectively replaced psychoanalysis as a “folk psychology,” that is, an everyday ethic and popular hermeneutic. At a deeper level, the encounter presaged a transformation in the character of the left—from a movement that aimed at a revolution in economic life to one that sought transformation of personal life and identity. In his 2015 Political Freud, Eli Zaretsky limned the outlines of this 50-year-old mutation, identifying both its costs and its benefits. In their CHS review essay (spring 2018), Benjamin Fong and Phillip Henry argued that Zaretsky had overstated the costs and undervalued the benefits. In this article, Zaretsky responds.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信