close
Response Paper on Julia Kristeva’s “Psychoanalysis- A Counter-depressant”
Unlike traditional feminists who always query, deny, even criticize Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytic theories on the interpretation of the oedipal phase and the position of the mother, Kristeva not only approves Freud’s insights but also expresses her perspective on his psychoanalytic theories. According to Freud, baby will leave his/her mother in the oedipal phase in order to be an individual subject. In my view, it means that people must accept all requests the patriarchal society requires us to do. Hence, patriarchal domination is necessary. For example, in the traditional patriarchal society, women are requested to be obedient to her husband, and women must tolerate even swallow down her anger in order to make her family happiness. It also shows the position of the mother is lower than father. One of Kristeva’s works, Black Sun, is a book about depression and melancholia. In my view, the sun always shines and lights the general truth. But why the sun becomes black here? The shining sun could infer a healthy body but the black one could infer a body suffering from many unhappy and miserable experiences. Hence, in my view, Kristeva may infer melancholia is the black sun. In Chapter one, “Psychoanalysis- A Counter-depressant,” Kristeva deals with the following issues, including depression relating to echolalia experiences, two sides on the depressive persons, the differentiation between the death drive and the depressed mood and death-bearing woman. But I would like to focus on how Kristeva portrays the power of melancholia and how melancholia comes into being at first. In the beginning of this chapter, Kristeva portrays the powerful and destructive power of melancholia as “A lethargic rays reach me, pinning me down to the ground . . . compelling me to silence, to renunciation” (180). Kristeva also reminds us that melancholia results from our traumatic experiences in the past. And people are miserable and long to commit suicide.
In the beginning of this essay, I would like to talk about how Kristeva provides a different interpretation of depression. Psychoanalysis shows that people are depressed because they are unaware while they obsess with their faces and admire them in a mirage. But in Kristeva’s view, depression results from “the loss of that essential other” (182). According to Kristeva, depression relates to echolalia experiences: “The child king becomes irredeemably sad before uttering his first words . . . because he has been irrevocably, desperately separated from the mother, a loss that causes him to try to find her again, along with other objects of love, first in the imagination, then in words” (182). In my own interpretation, children are depressed and despairing because there is no other figure to substitute the mother figure. Kristeva also claiming both melancholia and depression result from the subject’s “impossible mourning for the maternal object” (184).
Secondly, I would like to point out that Kristeva shows there are two dimensions about the depressive persons. In the first dimension, according to the traditional psychoanalytic theory, “Depression, like mourning, conceals an aggressiveness toward the lost object, thus revealing the ambivalence of the depressed person with respect to the object of mourning” (185). I love the lost object but I also hate it. In order not to lose the object I love, I imbed it in myself. I hate the object, so I hate myself. Because I have imbedded the object in myself, I will kill myself. So in this case, depression works as “The complaint against oneself is a hatred for the other, which is without doubt the substratum of an unsuspected sexual desire” (186). In my own interpretation, the subject is ambiguous. The subject is depressed because he/she yearns for an unrequited love for the lost object desperately. But unfortunately his/her desire can’t be realized, the subject becomes angry and determines to commit suicide. But I don’t know why the subject chooses to imbed the lost object he/she loves in the body. Does it mean that people can’t kill the lost object but he/she can kill him/herself? It is illegal to kill the lost object. In the second dimension in the narcissistic depressed persons’ case, “Sadness is a substitute object they become attached to, an object they tame and cherish for lack of another” (187). In my own interpretation, as far as the narcissistic depressed persons are concerned, sadness compensates for the lack of another. Because the subject is sad and tries to find another figure to substitute for the mother figure after the subject leaves his/her mother. But the narcissistic depressed person turns to sadness rather than finding another figure supplementing the mother figure. Kristeva points out the narcissistic depressed subject supplements to the lack of another via suicide, the composite of sadness, as the promises of nothingness, of death.
In the third place, I would like to reveal the differentiation between the death drive and the depressed mood. According to Freud, “Death drive is an intrapsychic manifestation of a phylogenetic inheritance going back to inorganic matter” (189). Freud also posits “Death drive as a tendency to return to the inorganic state and homeostasis, in opposition to the erotic principle of discharge and union” (189). According to Ferenczi, the expression of death drive is based on the human being’s tendency toward fragmentation and disintegration. But the depressed mood can be interpreted as “a defense against parceling.” In Kristeva’s view, “The depressed mood constitutes itself as a narcissistic support . . . but nevertheless presenting the self with an integrity, nonverbal” (191). And the depressive mood compensates for “symbolic invalidation and interruption.” The depressive mood is a way to protect against suicide, but it is a fragile one. In addition, Kristeva keeps a positive attitude toward schizoid because in her view “schizoid parceling is a defense against death” (191).
What’s more, Kristeva portrays that “Identifying no longer with the lose object but with a third party—father, form, schema” is a way to conquer sadness. The subject must identify with the father rather than the mother to assure “the subject’s entrance into the universe of signs and creation” (194). In my view, maybe it sounds a little bit awkward and unpersuasive because it forces people realize the truth—the society is constructed by patriarchy.
Last but not least, based on Freud’s insights, Kristeva mentions that the subject becomes autonomous through the loss of the mother. In Kristeva’s view, matricide is necessary to make the subject become individual being. If the subject would like to protect him/herself rather than perform the matricide act, the depressive or melancholic will put to death of the self. In my view, although Kristeva’s insights are based on Freud’s psychoanalytic theories from the male standpoint, it shows why the male figure become misogynist in the traditional society and reveals why the male resents the female figure and how the female is dominated by the male in our culture.
To sum up, Kristeva’s interpretation of depression is based on Freud’s perspectives of the oedipal phase. Although Freud or Kristeva’s interpretations keep the positive attitudes toward patriarchy on the surface, I think their interpretations are adopted because they reveals how our society is constructed by patriarchy, how patriarchy dominates ourselves, how patriarchy have controlled us since the echolalia via Freud or Kristeva’s interpretations.
Unlike traditional feminists who always query, deny, even criticize Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytic theories on the interpretation of the oedipal phase and the position of the mother, Kristeva not only approves Freud’s insights but also expresses her perspective on his psychoanalytic theories. According to Freud, baby will leave his/her mother in the oedipal phase in order to be an individual subject. In my view, it means that people must accept all requests the patriarchal society requires us to do. Hence, patriarchal domination is necessary. For example, in the traditional patriarchal society, women are requested to be obedient to her husband, and women must tolerate even swallow down her anger in order to make her family happiness. It also shows the position of the mother is lower than father. One of Kristeva’s works, Black Sun, is a book about depression and melancholia. In my view, the sun always shines and lights the general truth. But why the sun becomes black here? The shining sun could infer a healthy body but the black one could infer a body suffering from many unhappy and miserable experiences. Hence, in my view, Kristeva may infer melancholia is the black sun. In Chapter one, “Psychoanalysis- A Counter-depressant,” Kristeva deals with the following issues, including depression relating to echolalia experiences, two sides on the depressive persons, the differentiation between the death drive and the depressed mood and death-bearing woman. But I would like to focus on how Kristeva portrays the power of melancholia and how melancholia comes into being at first. In the beginning of this chapter, Kristeva portrays the powerful and destructive power of melancholia as “A lethargic rays reach me, pinning me down to the ground . . . compelling me to silence, to renunciation” (180). Kristeva also reminds us that melancholia results from our traumatic experiences in the past. And people are miserable and long to commit suicide.
In the beginning of this essay, I would like to talk about how Kristeva provides a different interpretation of depression. Psychoanalysis shows that people are depressed because they are unaware while they obsess with their faces and admire them in a mirage. But in Kristeva’s view, depression results from “the loss of that essential other” (182). According to Kristeva, depression relates to echolalia experiences: “The child king becomes irredeemably sad before uttering his first words . . . because he has been irrevocably, desperately separated from the mother, a loss that causes him to try to find her again, along with other objects of love, first in the imagination, then in words” (182). In my own interpretation, children are depressed and despairing because there is no other figure to substitute the mother figure. Kristeva also claiming both melancholia and depression result from the subject’s “impossible mourning for the maternal object” (184).
Secondly, I would like to point out that Kristeva shows there are two dimensions about the depressive persons. In the first dimension, according to the traditional psychoanalytic theory, “Depression, like mourning, conceals an aggressiveness toward the lost object, thus revealing the ambivalence of the depressed person with respect to the object of mourning” (185). I love the lost object but I also hate it. In order not to lose the object I love, I imbed it in myself. I hate the object, so I hate myself. Because I have imbedded the object in myself, I will kill myself. So in this case, depression works as “The complaint against oneself is a hatred for the other, which is without doubt the substratum of an unsuspected sexual desire” (186). In my own interpretation, the subject is ambiguous. The subject is depressed because he/she yearns for an unrequited love for the lost object desperately. But unfortunately his/her desire can’t be realized, the subject becomes angry and determines to commit suicide. But I don’t know why the subject chooses to imbed the lost object he/she loves in the body. Does it mean that people can’t kill the lost object but he/she can kill him/herself? It is illegal to kill the lost object. In the second dimension in the narcissistic depressed persons’ case, “Sadness is a substitute object they become attached to, an object they tame and cherish for lack of another” (187). In my own interpretation, as far as the narcissistic depressed persons are concerned, sadness compensates for the lack of another. Because the subject is sad and tries to find another figure to substitute for the mother figure after the subject leaves his/her mother. But the narcissistic depressed person turns to sadness rather than finding another figure supplementing the mother figure. Kristeva points out the narcissistic depressed subject supplements to the lack of another via suicide, the composite of sadness, as the promises of nothingness, of death.
In the third place, I would like to reveal the differentiation between the death drive and the depressed mood. According to Freud, “Death drive is an intrapsychic manifestation of a phylogenetic inheritance going back to inorganic matter” (189). Freud also posits “Death drive as a tendency to return to the inorganic state and homeostasis, in opposition to the erotic principle of discharge and union” (189). According to Ferenczi, the expression of death drive is based on the human being’s tendency toward fragmentation and disintegration. But the depressed mood can be interpreted as “a defense against parceling.” In Kristeva’s view, “The depressed mood constitutes itself as a narcissistic support . . . but nevertheless presenting the self with an integrity, nonverbal” (191). And the depressive mood compensates for “symbolic invalidation and interruption.” The depressive mood is a way to protect against suicide, but it is a fragile one. In addition, Kristeva keeps a positive attitude toward schizoid because in her view “schizoid parceling is a defense against death” (191).
What’s more, Kristeva portrays that “Identifying no longer with the lose object but with a third party—father, form, schema” is a way to conquer sadness. The subject must identify with the father rather than the mother to assure “the subject’s entrance into the universe of signs and creation” (194). In my view, maybe it sounds a little bit awkward and unpersuasive because it forces people realize the truth—the society is constructed by patriarchy.
Last but not least, based on Freud’s insights, Kristeva mentions that the subject becomes autonomous through the loss of the mother. In Kristeva’s view, matricide is necessary to make the subject become individual being. If the subject would like to protect him/herself rather than perform the matricide act, the depressive or melancholic will put to death of the self. In my view, although Kristeva’s insights are based on Freud’s psychoanalytic theories from the male standpoint, it shows why the male figure become misogynist in the traditional society and reveals why the male resents the female figure and how the female is dominated by the male in our culture.
To sum up, Kristeva’s interpretation of depression is based on Freud’s perspectives of the oedipal phase. Although Freud or Kristeva’s interpretations keep the positive attitudes toward patriarchy on the surface, I think their interpretations are adopted because they reveals how our society is constructed by patriarchy, how patriarchy dominates ourselves, how patriarchy have controlled us since the echolalia via Freud or Kristeva’s interpretations.
全站熱搜
留言列表
{{ article.title }}