What do you think?
Rate this book
Studies on Hysteria
Studies on Hysteria (German: Studien über Hysterie) was a book published in 1895 by Sigmund Freud & Josef Breuer. It contained a number of their case studies of "hysterics". It included one of their most famous cases, Breuer's Anna O. (real name: Bertha Pappenheim), which introduced the technique of psychoanalysis as a form of cure. At the time of its release, Studies on Hysteria wasn't well received by the European medical community. It was not until years later that psychoanalysis was recognized as a legitimate psychiatric tool. In the book were presented two different viewpoints: a neurophysiologic & a psychological cause for hysteria. Breuer described the causes of hysteria by supporting a neurophysiologic cause, while Freud used a psychological standpoint.
Altho Sigmund Freud has been associated with (& is indeed responsible for) much of the notoriety surrounding psychoanalysis & its rise to acceptance in Europe as well as the USA, Freud himself credits the birth of psychoanalysis to Josef Breuer & his work with Bertha Pappenheim. Unfortunately, he died before it received full acclaim.
Altho Sigmund Freud has been associated with (& is indeed responsible for) much of the notoriety surrounding psychoanalysis & its rise to acceptance in Europe as well as the USA, Freud himself credits the birth of psychoanalysis to Josef Breuer & his work with Bertha Pappenheim. Unfortunately, he died before it received full acclaim.
Paperback
First published January 1, 1895
241 people are currently reading
3511 people want to read
About the author
Sigmund Freud
4,366 books8,501 followersDr. Sigismund Freud (later changed to Sigmund) was a neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis, who created an entirely new approach to the understanding of the human personality. He is regarded as one of the most influential—and controversial—minds of the 20th century.
In 1873, Freud began to study medicine at the University of Vienna. After graduating, he worked at the Vienna General Hospital. He collaborated with Josef Breuer in treating hysteria by the recall of painful experiences under hypnosis. In 1885, Freud went to Paris as a student of the neurologist Jean Charcot. On his return to Vienna the following year, Freud set up in private practice, specialising in nervous and brain disorders. The same year he married Martha Bernays, with whom he had six children.
Freud developed the theory that humans have an unconscious in which sexual and aggressive impulses are in perpetual conflict for supremacy with the defences against them. In 1897, he began an intensive analysis of himself. In 1900, his major work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was published in which Freud analysed dreams in terms of unconscious desires and experiences.
In 1902, Freud was appointed Professor of Neuropathology at the University of Vienna, a post he held until 1938. Although the medical establishment disagreed with many of his theories, a group of pupils and followers began to gather around Freud. In 1910, the International Psychoanalytic Association was founded with Carl Jung, a close associate of Freud's, as the president. Jung later broke with Freud and developed his own theories.
After World War One, Freud spent less time in clinical observation and concentrated on the application of his theories to history, art, literature and anthropology. In 1923, he published 'The Ego and the Id', which suggested a new structural model of the mind, divided into the 'id, the 'ego' and the 'superego'.
In 1933, the Nazis publicly burnt a number of Freud's books. In 1938, shortly after the Nazis annexed Austria, Freud left Vienna for London with his wife and daughter Anna.
Freud had been diagnosed with cancer of the jaw in 1923, and underwent more than 30 operations. He died of cancer on 23 September 1939.
In 1873, Freud began to study medicine at the University of Vienna. After graduating, he worked at the Vienna General Hospital. He collaborated with Josef Breuer in treating hysteria by the recall of painful experiences under hypnosis. In 1885, Freud went to Paris as a student of the neurologist Jean Charcot. On his return to Vienna the following year, Freud set up in private practice, specialising in nervous and brain disorders. The same year he married Martha Bernays, with whom he had six children.
Freud developed the theory that humans have an unconscious in which sexual and aggressive impulses are in perpetual conflict for supremacy with the defences against them. In 1897, he began an intensive analysis of himself. In 1900, his major work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was published in which Freud analysed dreams in terms of unconscious desires and experiences.
In 1902, Freud was appointed Professor of Neuropathology at the University of Vienna, a post he held until 1938. Although the medical establishment disagreed with many of his theories, a group of pupils and followers began to gather around Freud. In 1910, the International Psychoanalytic Association was founded with Carl Jung, a close associate of Freud's, as the president. Jung later broke with Freud and developed his own theories.
After World War One, Freud spent less time in clinical observation and concentrated on the application of his theories to history, art, literature and anthropology. In 1923, he published 'The Ego and the Id', which suggested a new structural model of the mind, divided into the 'id, the 'ego' and the 'superego'.
In 1933, the Nazis publicly burnt a number of Freud's books. In 1938, shortly after the Nazis annexed Austria, Freud left Vienna for London with his wife and daughter Anna.
Freud had been diagnosed with cancer of the jaw in 1923, and underwent more than 30 operations. He died of cancer on 23 September 1939.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 77 reviews
December 25, 2016
دوستانِ گرانقدر، جالبترین و مهمترین قسمت از این کتابِ معروف را برایِ شما عزیزان، انتخاب کردم و در زیر برایتان مینویسم.. آنقدر جذاب و آموزنده بود که دلم نیامد، آنرا برایتان ننویسم
--------------------------------------------------
در سال 1880 میلادی، دختری 21 ساله و باهوش به نامِ <آنا> که از هیستریک و بیماری روانی رنج میبرد، برایِ درمان به نزدِ <فروید> و <برویر> فرستاده شد
این دختر بیچاره، حدودِ دو سال به دلایلِ نامعلومی دچارِ سلسله عوارضِ روحی و بدنی گردید... <آنا> زبانِ مادری را فراموش میکرد- دچار توهم و ترس میشد- گهگداری مایعات و آب از گلویش پایین نمیرفت- دست و بازوی راستش کاملاً فلج میشد- چشمانش به یکباره همه چیز را تار میدید- دچار بیماری چند شخصیتی نیز شده بود
دکتر <برویر> پس از معاینهٔ <آنا> پی برد که بیماری او دلایلِ طبیعی و ارگانیک ندارد، و بیماری وی، ناشی از جزر و مدهایِ عاطفی او میباشد
تحقیقاتِ اولیهٔ <فروید> و <برویر> نشان میدهد که <آنا> پدری بیمار و علیل دارد که همیشه در بستر است و <آنا> از او پرستاری میکند و شب و روز کنارِ پدر مینشیند
یکی از همین شبها <آنا> به روی صندلی نشسته بود، و از شدتِ خستگی دستش را از پشتِ صندلی آویزان میکند و در همان حال به خواب میرود.. زمانی که بیدار میشود، دستِ راستش را آویزان و لخت میابد. میخواهد سخن بگوید، امّا نمیتواند و بی اختیار به جای آنکه با زبانِ آلمانی که زبانِ مادریِ اوست، سخن بگوید، کلماتِ انگلیسی بکار میبرد
در مواردِ بعد، پدرِ بیمارش، ساعت را از او میپرسد، امّا <آنا> چشمانش تار میبیند و ساعت را نمیخواند
*********************
دکتر <برویر> دختر را به خوابِ مغناطیسی و مصنوعی برده و کلماتی را که <آنا> تکرار میکرده را به گوشش میخواند و <آنا> عکس العمل نشان میدهد.. دکتر متوجه میشود که بازیابی و یادآوری خاطراتِ فراموش شده، چارهٔ کار است
بارها این آزمایش را بر رویِ <آنا> تکرار میکردند تا پس از مدت ها <آنا> شفا یافت
***********************
و امّا این خاطرات چه بوده است!! ... زمانی که <آنا> کودک بود، زنی در منزل آنها کار میکرده که <آنا> از او نفرت داشته است.. و یکبار مشاهده میکند که زنِ خدمتکار با لیوانی که اهلِ خانه از آن آب مینوشند، به سگِ خود آب داده است
در زمانِ یادآوری این خاطره، <برویر> به سرعت به او لیوانی آب میدهد و <آنا> بدون مشکل آب را مینوشد
خاطرهٔ بعد: در شبی که <آنا> در کنارِ بستر پدر نشسته است، میخواهد دعا بخواند، ولی دعایی را به یاد نمی آورد، لذا ترانه ای انگلیسی را که در کودکی از خدمتکارِ خانه آموخته، به زبان می آورد
یک و سال و نیم، دکتر <برویر> بر رویِ درمانِ <آنا> کار میکند، تا آنکه این دختر بالاخره میتواند به زبانِ مادری اش سخن بگوید
*************************
دوستانِ عزیزم، <برویر> و <فروید>، بیماری هیستریک و ناخوشیِ <آنا> را اینگونه توجیه میکنند که
دخترک خسته و فرسوده در کنارِ بسترِ پدرش نشسته و از بیماریِ طولانی و پرستاریِ بیهودهٔ خویش خسته و ناامید شده است و به فکرِ راه چاره و رهایی خویش افتاده است ولی ترکِ پدر سببِ عذاب وجدانش میشود... و درحالی که دستش از پشت آویزان شده، به خواب میرود و زمانی که بیدار میشود، دستش خواب رفته است و نمیتواند دستش را تکان دهد... امّا او خوشحال میشود و تصور میکند دستش فلج شده است و همین موضوع تغییری در زندگیِ کسالت آورِ او ایجاد میکند.. این خودباوری سبب میشود که دست راستش واقعاً فلج شود
و زمانی که پدر از او ساعت را میپرسد، <آنا> در حالِ گریه کردن بوده است و زمانی که به ساعت نگاه میکند، ساعت را خوب نمیبیند و بازهم به خود القا میکند که چشمانش تار میبیند و بینایی اش کم شده است
آن شبی که <آنا> رویِ صندلی از خستگی بخواب میرود، خواب میبیند که مارِ سیاهی به او و پدرش حمله میکند و <آنا> وحشت کرده و به جای فریاد و کمک خواستن، ترانهٔ انگلیسی که از خدمتکارشان در کودکی یاد گرفته بود میخواند، چراکه مارِ سیاه او را به یادِ خدمتکارِ منزلشان می اندازد که <آنا> از او نفرت داشته است
از طرفی خاطرهٔ آب دادنِ به سگ توسط خدمتکار، آنهم با لیوانِ <آنا> سبب میشود تا <آنا> از آب بیزار شده و واقعاً آب از گلویش پایین نرود
*************************
بله عزیزانم، طبقِ گفتهٔ زنده یاد <فروید> خاطرات و هیجاناتِ رنج آور پیشین، بنابر اصلِ "تبدل هیستریکی"، به صورتِ بدنی و روانی به جانِ انسان افتاده و دمار از روزگارِ انسانِ بیچاره در می آورد
تنها راهِ درمانِ بیماری هیستری، "روش گفتاری" است که هیجاناتِ دردناکِ پنهانی را برمی انگیزد و ذهن را از وجودِ آنها پالایش و پاکیزه میکند
-------------------------------------------------
امیدوارم این ریویو برایِ شما دوستانِ خردگرا و اهلِ دانش، مفید بوده باشه
<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>
--------------------------------------------------
در سال 1880 میلادی، دختری 21 ساله و باهوش به نامِ <آنا> که از هیستریک و بیماری روانی رنج میبرد، برایِ درمان به نزدِ <فروید> و <برویر> فرستاده شد
این دختر بیچاره، حدودِ دو سال به دلایلِ نامعلومی دچارِ سلسله عوارضِ روحی و بدنی گردید... <آنا> زبانِ مادری را فراموش میکرد- دچار توهم و ترس میشد- گهگداری مایعات و آب از گلویش پایین نمیرفت- دست و بازوی راستش کاملاً فلج میشد- چشمانش به یکباره همه چیز را تار میدید- دچار بیماری چند شخصیتی نیز شده بود
دکتر <برویر> پس از معاینهٔ <آنا> پی برد که بیماری او دلایلِ طبیعی و ارگانیک ندارد، و بیماری وی، ناشی از جزر و مدهایِ عاطفی او میباشد
تحقیقاتِ اولیهٔ <فروید> و <برویر> نشان میدهد که <آنا> پدری بیمار و علیل دارد که همیشه در بستر است و <آنا> از او پرستاری میکند و شب و روز کنارِ پدر مینشیند
یکی از همین شبها <آنا> به روی صندلی نشسته بود، و از شدتِ خستگی دستش را از پشتِ صندلی آویزان میکند و در همان حال به خواب میرود.. زمانی که بیدار میشود، دستِ راستش را آویزان و لخت میابد. میخواهد سخن بگوید، امّا نمیتواند و بی اختیار به جای آنکه با زبانِ آلمانی که زبانِ مادریِ اوست، سخن بگوید، کلماتِ انگلیسی بکار میبرد
در مواردِ بعد، پدرِ بیمارش، ساعت را از او میپرسد، امّا <آنا> چشمانش تار میبیند و ساعت را نمیخواند
*********************
دکتر <برویر> دختر را به خوابِ مغناطیسی و مصنوعی برده و کلماتی را که <آنا> تکرار میکرده را به گوشش میخواند و <آنا> عکس العمل نشان میدهد.. دکتر متوجه میشود که بازیابی و یادآوری خاطراتِ فراموش شده، چارهٔ کار است
بارها این آزمایش را بر رویِ <آنا> تکرار میکردند تا پس از مدت ها <آنا> شفا یافت
***********************
و امّا این خاطرات چه بوده است!! ... زمانی که <آنا> کودک بود، زنی در منزل آنها کار میکرده که <آنا> از او نفرت داشته است.. و یکبار مشاهده میکند که زنِ خدمتکار با لیوانی که اهلِ خانه از آن آب مینوشند، به سگِ خود آب داده است
در زمانِ یادآوری این خاطره، <برویر> به سرعت به او لیوانی آب میدهد و <آنا> بدون مشکل آب را مینوشد
خاطرهٔ بعد: در شبی که <آنا> در کنارِ بستر پدر نشسته است، میخواهد دعا بخواند، ولی دعایی را به یاد نمی آورد، لذا ترانه ای انگلیسی را که در کودکی از خدمتکارِ خانه آموخته، به زبان می آورد
یک و سال و نیم، دکتر <برویر> بر رویِ درمانِ <آنا> کار میکند، تا آنکه این دختر بالاخره میتواند به زبانِ مادری اش سخن بگوید
*************************
دوستانِ عزیزم، <برویر> و <فروید>، بیماری هیستریک و ناخوشیِ <آنا> را اینگونه توجیه میکنند که
دخترک خسته و فرسوده در کنارِ بسترِ پدرش نشسته و از بیماریِ طولانی و پرستاریِ بیهودهٔ خویش خسته و ناامید شده است و به فکرِ راه چاره و رهایی خویش افتاده است ولی ترکِ پدر سببِ عذاب وجدانش میشود... و درحالی که دستش از پشت آویزان شده، به خواب میرود و زمانی که بیدار میشود، دستش خواب رفته است و نمیتواند دستش را تکان دهد... امّا او خوشحال میشود و تصور میکند دستش فلج شده است و همین موضوع تغییری در زندگیِ کسالت آورِ او ایجاد میکند.. این خودباوری سبب میشود که دست راستش واقعاً فلج شود
و زمانی که پدر از او ساعت را میپرسد، <آنا> در حالِ گریه کردن بوده است و زمانی که به ساعت نگاه میکند، ساعت را خوب نمیبیند و بازهم به خود القا میکند که چشمانش تار میبیند و بینایی اش کم شده است
آن شبی که <آنا> رویِ صندلی از خستگی بخواب میرود، خواب میبیند که مارِ سیاهی به او و پدرش حمله میکند و <آنا> وحشت کرده و به جای فریاد و کمک خواستن، ترانهٔ انگلیسی که از خدمتکارشان در کودکی یاد گرفته بود میخواند، چراکه مارِ سیاه او را به یادِ خدمتکارِ منزلشان می اندازد که <آنا> از او نفرت داشته است
از طرفی خاطرهٔ آب دادنِ به سگ توسط خدمتکار، آنهم با لیوانِ <آنا> سبب میشود تا <آنا> از آب بیزار شده و واقعاً آب از گلویش پایین نرود
*************************
بله عزیزانم، طبقِ گفتهٔ زنده یاد <فروید> خاطرات و هیجاناتِ رنج آور پیشین، بنابر اصلِ "تبدل هیستریکی"، به صورتِ بدنی و روانی به جانِ انسان افتاده و دمار از روزگارِ انسانِ بیچاره در می آورد
تنها راهِ درمانِ بیماری هیستری، "روش گفتاری" است که هیجاناتِ دردناکِ پنهانی را برمی انگیزد و ذهن را از وجودِ آنها پالایش و پاکیزه میکند
-------------------------------------------------
امیدوارم این ریویو برایِ شما دوستانِ خردگرا و اهلِ دانش، مفید بوده باشه
<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>
October 5, 2024
The English version can be found below.
-----------
German version:
Beinhaltet wirklich viele interessante Aspekte, wenn auch mit extrem sexistischen Auffassungen! Aber immerhin weiß ich jetzt, warum in historischen Filmen Frauen immer auf einem Sofa sitzen und irgendwelche Muster sticken😅, denn für „Tagträume bieten die weiblichen Handarbeiten so viel Anlass“ und fördern somit die Gesundheit (S. 36; aber vom Satzbau umgestellt).
Aber inhaltlich finde ich bei diesem frühen Werk Freuds und Breuers Ansätze die Abwehrvorgänge und das Unbewusste wirklich spannend, ebenso Breuers Teil zur Spaltung der Psyche und die Ausführungen zu den hypnoiden Zuständen.
Ich finde Breuers Teile allerdings wesentlich wissenschaftlicher formuliert und besser nachvollziehbar und Freud hat etwas Probleme bei der wissenschaftlichen Argumentation, was ich auch bei anderen seiner Werke bereits kritisiert habe.
Die Fallgeschichten von Freud habe ich nur überflogen und fand ich weniger spannend als das Kapitel „Über den psychischen Mechanismus hysterischer Phänomene (Breuer und Freud) (1893)“ und „Theoretisches (Breuer) (1895)“. Und bei „Zur Psychotherapie der Hysterie (Freud) (1895)“ war mir das meiste schon aus anderen Aufsätzen und Biografien bekannt (besonders: Alt: Sigmund Freud; Urban: Hofmannsthal, Freud und die Psychoanalyse).
Gesamt: 3,4🌟
----------
English version:
It really does contain many interesting aspects, albeit with extremely sexist views! But at least I now know why women always sit on a sofa and embroider patterns in historical films😅, because women's handicrafts provide so much opportunity for ‘daydreams’ and thus promote health (see p. 36).
But in terms of content, I find Freud's and Breuer's approaches to defence processes and the unconscious really exciting in this early work, as well as Breuer's part on the splitting of the psyche and the explanations on hypnoid states.
However, I find Breuer's parts much more scientifically formulated and easier to understand and Freud has some problems with scientific argumentation, which I have also criticised in other of his works.
I only skimmed Freud's case studies and found them less exciting than the chapters ‘On the Psychic Mechanism of Hysterical Phenomena (Breuer and Freud) (1893)’ and ‘Theory (Breuer) (1895)’. And most of ‘On the Psychotherapy of Hysteria (Freud) (1895)’ was already known to me from other essays and biographies (especially: Alt: Sigmund Freud; Urban: Hofmannsthal, Freud und die Psychoanalyse).
Total: 3.4🌟
-----------
German version:
Beinhaltet wirklich viele interessante Aspekte, wenn auch mit extrem sexistischen Auffassungen! Aber immerhin weiß ich jetzt, warum in historischen Filmen Frauen immer auf einem Sofa sitzen und irgendwelche Muster sticken😅, denn für „Tagträume bieten die weiblichen Handarbeiten so viel Anlass“ und fördern somit die Gesundheit (S. 36; aber vom Satzbau umgestellt).
Aber inhaltlich finde ich bei diesem frühen Werk Freuds und Breuers Ansätze die Abwehrvorgänge und das Unbewusste wirklich spannend, ebenso Breuers Teil zur Spaltung der Psyche und die Ausführungen zu den hypnoiden Zuständen.
Ich finde Breuers Teile allerdings wesentlich wissenschaftlicher formuliert und besser nachvollziehbar und Freud hat etwas Probleme bei der wissenschaftlichen Argumentation, was ich auch bei anderen seiner Werke bereits kritisiert habe.
Die Fallgeschichten von Freud habe ich nur überflogen und fand ich weniger spannend als das Kapitel „Über den psychischen Mechanismus hysterischer Phänomene (Breuer und Freud) (1893)“ und „Theoretisches (Breuer) (1895)“. Und bei „Zur Psychotherapie der Hysterie (Freud) (1895)“ war mir das meiste schon aus anderen Aufsätzen und Biografien bekannt (besonders: Alt: Sigmund Freud; Urban: Hofmannsthal, Freud und die Psychoanalyse).
Gesamt: 3,4🌟
----------
English version:
It really does contain many interesting aspects, albeit with extremely sexist views! But at least I now know why women always sit on a sofa and embroider patterns in historical films😅, because women's handicrafts provide so much opportunity for ‘daydreams’ and thus promote health (see p. 36).
But in terms of content, I find Freud's and Breuer's approaches to defence processes and the unconscious really exciting in this early work, as well as Breuer's part on the splitting of the psyche and the explanations on hypnoid states.
However, I find Breuer's parts much more scientifically formulated and easier to understand and Freud has some problems with scientific argumentation, which I have also criticised in other of his works.
I only skimmed Freud's case studies and found them less exciting than the chapters ‘On the Psychic Mechanism of Hysterical Phenomena (Breuer and Freud) (1893)’ and ‘Theory (Breuer) (1895)’. And most of ‘On the Psychotherapy of Hysteria (Freud) (1895)’ was already known to me from other essays and biographies (especially: Alt: Sigmund Freud; Urban: Hofmannsthal, Freud und die Psychoanalyse).
Total: 3.4🌟
November 2, 2020
This may have been the second book by Sigmund Freud that I ever read, the first being his 'Civilization and its Discontents'. It isn't bad so far as helping the reader understand the origins of depth psychology in general and psychoanalysis in particular--not something I'd recommend 'Discontents' for.
Those interested in this very early study, but not in the full development of psychoanalytic theory, may also be interested in two films based on the events behind this book. First, the film 'Freud: The Secret Passion' (1962). Second, the more recent film: 'When Nietzsche Wept' (2007) and the book it was based on by the analyst Irvin D. Yalom.
Those interested in this very early study, but not in the full development of psychoanalytic theory, may also be interested in two films based on the events behind this book. First, the film 'Freud: The Secret Passion' (1962). Second, the more recent film: 'When Nietzsche Wept' (2007) and the book it was based on by the analyst Irvin D. Yalom.
September 20, 2015
3 1/2 stars
This was my first Freud read and before reading this text, i had a very narrow, freud-only-talked-about-sex version understanding of him (penis envy!). This book has definitely put many of my unjustified criticisms to Freud and Psychoanalysis to rest. Freud and Breuer look into the psychic origins of various physical/somatic conditions that they term as Hysteria. The most interesting aspect of their study was their theory of the 'Splitting of the mind' (and not consciousness). Particularly, that certain ideas are 'inadmissible to consciousness' and they cannot be influences by conscious ideas. So most people suffering from depression, for instance, cannot be cured merely by being given anti-depressants or be forced to 'think' positively, the origin of their depression has to be brought to the threshold of the consciousness, through 'speech' (as 1 eg). This also implies that Hystera patients are not necessarily weak-minded, for the weak-mindedness itself is a product of the splitting of the mind.
Its worth a read.
This was my first Freud read and before reading this text, i had a very narrow, freud-only-talked-about-sex version understanding of him (penis envy!). This book has definitely put many of my unjustified criticisms to Freud and Psychoanalysis to rest. Freud and Breuer look into the psychic origins of various physical/somatic conditions that they term as Hysteria. The most interesting aspect of their study was their theory of the 'Splitting of the mind' (and not consciousness). Particularly, that certain ideas are 'inadmissible to consciousness' and they cannot be influences by conscious ideas. So most people suffering from depression, for instance, cannot be cured merely by being given anti-depressants or be forced to 'think' positively, the origin of their depression has to be brought to the threshold of the consciousness, through 'speech' (as 1 eg). This also implies that Hystera patients are not necessarily weak-minded, for the weak-mindedness itself is a product of the splitting of the mind.
Its worth a read.
January 28, 2008
Hysteria is one of those concepts that has just taken hold in my head. I refer to it often when talking or writing about art or social ills / structures. What doesn't work for me is Freud's deferment to the individual... that the individual body must not only bear the burden of a malformed social structure but the blame as well.
I think it would be more accurate to say that a collection of individual bodies (in Freud's era, they would be female) perform the symptoms of patriarchy. I mean, many of his patients were exhibiting the same symptoms. And now in our society, where are the hysterics? Hysteria takes on different articulations as appropriate to its own time and traumas. Psychological disorders are manifest according to what "makes sense" in any particular era. Anna O. style hysteria is no longer fashionable. This says to me that these "illnesses" are not diseases of the individual mind but of the system.
I think it would be more accurate to say that a collection of individual bodies (in Freud's era, they would be female) perform the symptoms of patriarchy. I mean, many of his patients were exhibiting the same symptoms. And now in our society, where are the hysterics? Hysteria takes on different articulations as appropriate to its own time and traumas. Psychological disorders are manifest according to what "makes sense" in any particular era. Anna O. style hysteria is no longer fashionable. This says to me that these "illnesses" are not diseases of the individual mind but of the system.
November 9, 2019
بروئر در صفحه 306 کتاب می نویسد:
در بیماران ما آن بخش از ذهن که از بخش دیگر گسسته می شود، 《به دل تاریکی پرت می شود》، درست همان گونه که تیتان ها در دهانه ی اتشفشان اتنا محبوس شده اند، موجودات اساطیری ای که می توانند زمین را به لرزه در آورند، اما هرگز نمی توانند وارد روشنایی روز بشوند.
وقتی شرح حال های روزانه ای را که بروئر و فروید از بیماران خود نوشته اند دنبال می کنیم متوجه حجم کار بالینی ای می شویم که انجام شده تا به نظریه ای در باب روان انسان دست یافته شود. وقتی روند درمان تا ماه ها به طول می انجامد و آن ها به دنبال جزئیات و فرضیات جدید هستند تا نشانه ای تنی را توجیه کنند و یا از بین ببرند. با مطالعه ی این شرح حال ها متوجه روند شکل گیری مفاهیمی مثل مقاومت و ناخودآگاه و نحوه شکل گیری نشانه ها و زبان کنایی هیستری می شویم.
در بیماران ما آن بخش از ذهن که از بخش دیگر گسسته می شود، 《به دل تاریکی پرت می شود》، درست همان گونه که تیتان ها در دهانه ی اتشفشان اتنا محبوس شده اند، موجودات اساطیری ای که می توانند زمین را به لرزه در آورند، اما هرگز نمی توانند وارد روشنایی روز بشوند.
وقتی شرح حال های روزانه ای را که بروئر و فروید از بیماران خود نوشته اند دنبال می کنیم متوجه حجم کار بالینی ای می شویم که انجام شده تا به نظریه ای در باب روان انسان دست یافته شود. وقتی روند درمان تا ماه ها به طول می انجامد و آن ها به دنبال جزئیات و فرضیات جدید هستند تا نشانه ای تنی را توجیه کنند و یا از بین ببرند. با مطالعه ی این شرح حال ها متوجه روند شکل گیری مفاهیمی مثل مقاومت و ناخودآگاه و نحوه شکل گیری نشانه ها و زبان کنایی هیستری می شویم.
Want to read
November 27, 2021“In the 1890s, when Freud was in the dawn of his career, he was struck by how many of his female patients were revealing childhood incest victimization to him. Freud concluded that child sexual abuse was one of the major causes of emotional disturbances in adult women and wrote a brilliant and humane paper called “The Aetiology of Hysteria.” However, rather than receiving acclaim from his colleagues for his ground-breaking insights, Freud met with scorn. He was ridiculed for believing that men of excellent reputation (most of his patients came from upstanding homes) could be perpetrators of incest.
Within a few years, Freud buckled under this heavy pressure and recanted his conclusions. In their place he proposed the “Oedipus complex,” which became the foundation of modern psychology. According to this theory any young girl actually desires sexual contact with her father, because she wants to compete with her mother to be the most special person in his life. Freud used this construct to conclude that the episodes of incestuous abuse his clients had revealed to him had never taken place; they were simply fantasies of events the women had wished for when they were children and that the women had come to believe were real. This construct started a hundred-year history in the mental health field of blaming victims for the abuse perpetrated on them and outright discrediting of women’s and children’s reports of mistreatment by men.”
Within a few years, Freud buckled under this heavy pressure and recanted his conclusions. In their place he proposed the “Oedipus complex,” which became the foundation of modern psychology. According to this theory any young girl actually desires sexual contact with her father, because she wants to compete with her mother to be the most special person in his life. Freud used this construct to conclude that the episodes of incestuous abuse his clients had revealed to him had never taken place; they were simply fantasies of events the women had wished for when they were children and that the women had come to believe were real. This construct started a hundred-year history in the mental health field of blaming victims for the abuse perpetrated on them and outright discrediting of women’s and children’s reports of mistreatment by men.”
January 5, 2019
нна О. е псевдоним на пациентка на Йозеф Бройер, който публикува изследване на нейния случай в книгата си „Изследвания върху хистерията“, написана в сътрудничество със Зигмунд Фройд.
Анна О всъщност се казва Берта Папенхайм (на немски: Bertha Pappenheim) и е австрийска еврейка феминистка и основател на Jüdischer Frauenbund, лекувана от Бройер поради тежка кашлица, парализа в дясната част на тялото, смущения в зрението, слуха и говора, както и халюцинации и загуба на съзнание. Тя е диагностицирана с хистерия. Фройд заключава, че болестта е резултат от мъката от истинската и физическа болест на баща ѝ, която по-късно води до смъртта му.
През годините се предава коментар за това какво произтича от Случаят Анна О., съдържащ малко иронична отсенка. Анна О. загубва терапевта си д-р Бройер, д-р Бройер загубва пациентката си Анна О., Фройд загубва приятеля си и колега Бройер. Единствено съпругата на Бройер спечелва четвърто им дете – дъщерята Дора, създадено през втория меден месец на семейство Бройер в Италия, случил се така бързо и непредвидено.
Книгата съдържа четири текста: Йозеф Бройер, Зигмунд Фройд „За психичния механизъм на феномена на хистерия. Предварително съобщение”, Йозеф Бройер „Г-ца Анна О…”, Зигмунд Фройд „Психотерапия на хистерията” и послеслова на д-р Давид Иерохам „Относно г-ца Анна О.”. Това са различни по трудност за лаика научни четива. Ако първият текст на двамата приятели лекари Бройер и Фройд е едно обобщение на случая, маркиращо прозренията в прехода от метода на хипнозата към метода на свободните асоциации, то вторият текст може да се чете и като камерен „роман” с двама герои – г-ца Анна О. и д-р Йозеф Бройер, неин терапевт. Третият текст – най-трудният като научно четиво – „Психотерапия на хистерията” ни предлага да избродим заедно с Фройд прохождането на психотерапевтичното лечение на хистерията – прехода от хипноза към метода на свободните асоциации и прозренията на бащата на психоанализата за приложимостта на този метод при неврозите. Послесловът на д-р Давид Иерохам ни насочва към културноисторическия контекст на случая Анна О., с хуманистичния нюанс в общуването пациент-терапевт.
Това, което обединава тези четири различни текста, културологичният смисъл на тези четири текста е, че пациент и терапевт са заедно в нелекия, но толкова вълнуващ, танц на пренос и контрапренос. Надделяване на хуманното, надделяване на човешкото достойнство, надделяване над демоните ни, които като нощните кошмари на Гоя ни тласкат към несъзнаваното.
Анна О всъщност се казва Берта Папенхайм (на немски: Bertha Pappenheim) и е австрийска еврейка феминистка и основател на Jüdischer Frauenbund, лекувана от Бройер поради тежка кашлица, парализа в дясната част на тялото, смущения в зрението, слуха и говора, както и халюцинации и загуба на съзнание. Тя е диагностицирана с хистерия. Фройд заключава, че болестта е резултат от мъката от истинската и физическа болест на баща ѝ, която по-късно води до смъртта му.
През годините се предава коментар за това какво произтича от Случаят Анна О., съдържащ малко иронична отсенка. Анна О. загубва терапевта си д-р Бройер, д-р Бройер загубва пациентката си Анна О., Фройд загубва приятеля си и колега Бройер. Единствено съпругата на Бройер спечелва четвърто им дете – дъщерята Дора, създадено през втория меден месец на семейство Бройер в Италия, случил се така бързо и непредвидено.
Книгата съдържа четири текста: Йозеф Бройер, Зигмунд Фройд „За психичния механизъм на феномена на хистерия. Предварително съобщение”, Йозеф Бройер „Г-ца Анна О…”, Зигмунд Фройд „Психотерапия на хистерията” и послеслова на д-р Давид Иерохам „Относно г-ца Анна О.”. Това са различни по трудност за лаика научни четива. Ако първият текст на двамата приятели лекари Бройер и Фройд е едно обобщение на случая, маркиращо прозренията в прехода от метода на хипнозата към метода на свободните асоциации, то вторият текст може да се чете и като камерен „роман” с двама герои – г-ца Анна О. и д-р Йозеф Бройер, неин терапевт. Третият текст – най-трудният като научно четиво – „Психотерапия на хистерията” ни предлага да избродим заедно с Фройд прохождането на психотерапевтичното лечение на хистерията – прехода от хипноза към метода на свободните асоциации и прозренията на бащата на психоанализата за приложимостта на този метод при неврозите. Послесловът на д-р Давид Иерохам ни насочва към културноисторическия контекст на случая Анна О., с хуманистичния нюанс в общуването пациент-терапевт.
Това, което обединава тези четири различни текста, културологичният смисъл на тези четири текста е, че пациент и терапевт са заедно в нелекия, но толкова вълнуващ, танц на пренос и контрапренос. Надделяване на хуманното, надделяване на човешкото достойнство, надделяване над демоните ни, които като нощните кошмари на Гоя ни тласкат към несъзнаваното.
Read
November 30, 2024I love mum <33333
September 6, 2018
In 1895, Joseph Breuer and Sigmund Freud, two Viennese doctors, published a work in which they gave detailed descriptions of some new experimental technique they stumbled upon. During Freud's time, almost every non-classifiable disturbance was termed a neurological disease, and women were deemed to be especially prone to such disorders - hence the term histeria (from the Greek 'hystera' - the word for uterus). The symptoms with which these 'patients' came to clinics such as that of Breuer and Freud were very variable: loss of feeling in limbs, depression, dissociations, hallucinations, insomnia, etc.
Now, mostly these patients were treated with contemporary medicine - electrical stimulation, warm baths, retreats, drugs. Mostly, without much result. Freud and Breuer tried to tackle the problem from a different angle.
According to them, human beings form ideas about the things we experience, and these ideas are accompanied by emotions. Normally, when dealing with experiences, specifically negative ones, we find a way to process them. So when something bad happens, or someone offends us, we scoff at the other person or situation; we associate other ideas with the experience and hence nuance our experience; etc. In other words: we process the experience and that's that.
But sometimes things can go wrong. When a situation happens that we, unconsciously, are ashamed of or feel really bad about, we might try mentally to suppress the formation of the idea. But this is impossible. The idea is formed, complete with associated emotion, but it will live in a mental space divided from our consciousness. It's still there though. And when new events happen, that our unconsciousness associates with the past (suppressed) event, our body jams and this is translated into bodily failings, i.e. hysterical symptoms - or rather: symbols, as Freud calls them.
The task of the therapist, when dealing with a patient suffering from hysteria, is to integrate the suppressed ideas (which linger in our unconsciousness) into our consciousness. This can be done by making the patient recall the past event. The patient lies down, is hypnotized (or not), and then the psychotherapist asks the patient intimate questions about the symptoms, and especially the origin of these symptoms. And so the patient will integrate the repressed ideas into his or her consciousness, the hysteria will disappear, and everything's fine.
According to Freud.
The most interesting part of the book is Part 2, in which Breuer and Freud (mostly Freud) describe five case studies of patients with hysteria and how they applied the above mentioned therapy - which was at that time experimental. They call it the 'cathartic method' (from the Greek katharsis: cleansing/purging), which - of course - is the proto-psychoanalysis of Freud's later work.
There are various interesting remarks to be made on these case studies:
1. All of the patients are women, and from the language Breuer, but especially Freud, uses it is easy to note a sort of obsession with women. So when Freud describes his patients, he notes peculiar things like: it's a young, beautiful woman. One wonders what this has to do with the medical treatment.
2. All the patients that are described suffer from the same wide range of symptoms: loss of sense, loss of feeling in limbs, sleeping disorders, hallucinations, anxiety disorders, symptoms of depression/mood disorder, etc.
3. Initially treatment fails, and it is only when the psychotherapist starts to ask intimate questions that the symptoms seem to lessen. And it is only when the psychotherapist has finally unearthed the true, original event that led to the hysteria, that the patient (almost instantaneously) recovers.
4. The original event that is being repressed, is almost in each case a sexual one. Freud calls this erotic ideas.
An example will illustrate the absurdity of these theories (although now I give away my own position on the case...).
Freud sees a patient (a young, lively, although typical hysterical girl of 24 years of age) who suffers from severe nerve pains in hips and legs. Hypnosis doesn't work on her, so Freud starts to ask questions. Initially the treatment doesn't really work; the pains don't stop appearing and she doesn't fell well.
Luckily, Freud knows why: the patient is not honest when explaining the true traumatic experiences that led to these symptoms of hysteria. In the end, Freud probes her some more and she reveals that she secretly was in love with her brother-in-law. Her erotic longing for this prince on his white horse, coupled with the feeling of shame and guilt (especially since her sister, the wife of this man, died), is the true reason why she suffers. She recovers and that's that.
Freud ends his description of the case of Fraulein Elisabeth von R. with the following peculiar, but typical passage:
"In the spring of 1894, I heard that she was going to a private ball for which I was able to get an invitation, and I did not allow the opportunity to escape me of seeing my former patient whirl past in a lively dance. Since then, by her own inclination, she has married someone unknown to me." (p. 160)
(A smilar case study, on a certain 'Katharina' explains how, when Freud is walking in the mountains, the daughter of the woman who rents the room of the inn where Freud stays asks for a doctor. She explains she has hysterical symptoms; Freud asks her intimate questions: and lo and behold! the reason for the hysteria is discovered - the girl was sexually assaulted by her uncle, who she later saw raping her cousin, and the repressed ideas about these experiences are treated and the girl is healed.)
It is very hard to give a fair hearing when reading such ridiculous nonsense. And I think we should rather treat it like that: nonsense.
Freud was an oversexed fantast; an intellectual who couldn't rid himself of the Victorian upper-class view on women; and a pseudo-scientist who saw the unconsciousness as the cause of almost every detail of our mental world. The unconsciousness either respresses or accepts ideas; and this either leads to hysteria or to a healthy learning experience. The problem with all this is that it makes for good literature, but bad science. Freud's theories are so vague, all-encompassing and (especially) untestable that it is very hard to see why they have been so influential....
To end this review: I have to credit Joseph Breuer for intellectual honesty. When Freud started to interpret hysteria in a primarily sexual way, Breuer parted with Freud. So one has at least to give Breuer credit for trying to develop a new experimental method of treating patients with neurological symptoms - a noble goal. Freud took it and ran off with it.
So, read this book as a historical (and hysterical) document, and keep in mind that hysteria isn't a classified diagnosis anymore; psychoanalysis isn't a legitimate treatment anymore; Freud's theories aren't scientifically accepted anymore.
Now, mostly these patients were treated with contemporary medicine - electrical stimulation, warm baths, retreats, drugs. Mostly, without much result. Freud and Breuer tried to tackle the problem from a different angle.
According to them, human beings form ideas about the things we experience, and these ideas are accompanied by emotions. Normally, when dealing with experiences, specifically negative ones, we find a way to process them. So when something bad happens, or someone offends us, we scoff at the other person or situation; we associate other ideas with the experience and hence nuance our experience; etc. In other words: we process the experience and that's that.
But sometimes things can go wrong. When a situation happens that we, unconsciously, are ashamed of or feel really bad about, we might try mentally to suppress the formation of the idea. But this is impossible. The idea is formed, complete with associated emotion, but it will live in a mental space divided from our consciousness. It's still there though. And when new events happen, that our unconsciousness associates with the past (suppressed) event, our body jams and this is translated into bodily failings, i.e. hysterical symptoms - or rather: symbols, as Freud calls them.
The task of the therapist, when dealing with a patient suffering from hysteria, is to integrate the suppressed ideas (which linger in our unconsciousness) into our consciousness. This can be done by making the patient recall the past event. The patient lies down, is hypnotized (or not), and then the psychotherapist asks the patient intimate questions about the symptoms, and especially the origin of these symptoms. And so the patient will integrate the repressed ideas into his or her consciousness, the hysteria will disappear, and everything's fine.
According to Freud.
The most interesting part of the book is Part 2, in which Breuer and Freud (mostly Freud) describe five case studies of patients with hysteria and how they applied the above mentioned therapy - which was at that time experimental. They call it the 'cathartic method' (from the Greek katharsis: cleansing/purging), which - of course - is the proto-psychoanalysis of Freud's later work.
There are various interesting remarks to be made on these case studies:
1. All of the patients are women, and from the language Breuer, but especially Freud, uses it is easy to note a sort of obsession with women. So when Freud describes his patients, he notes peculiar things like: it's a young, beautiful woman. One wonders what this has to do with the medical treatment.
2. All the patients that are described suffer from the same wide range of symptoms: loss of sense, loss of feeling in limbs, sleeping disorders, hallucinations, anxiety disorders, symptoms of depression/mood disorder, etc.
3. Initially treatment fails, and it is only when the psychotherapist starts to ask intimate questions that the symptoms seem to lessen. And it is only when the psychotherapist has finally unearthed the true, original event that led to the hysteria, that the patient (almost instantaneously) recovers.
4. The original event that is being repressed, is almost in each case a sexual one. Freud calls this erotic ideas.
An example will illustrate the absurdity of these theories (although now I give away my own position on the case...).
Freud sees a patient (a young, lively, although typical hysterical girl of 24 years of age) who suffers from severe nerve pains in hips and legs. Hypnosis doesn't work on her, so Freud starts to ask questions. Initially the treatment doesn't really work; the pains don't stop appearing and she doesn't fell well.
Luckily, Freud knows why: the patient is not honest when explaining the true traumatic experiences that led to these symptoms of hysteria. In the end, Freud probes her some more and she reveals that she secretly was in love with her brother-in-law. Her erotic longing for this prince on his white horse, coupled with the feeling of shame and guilt (especially since her sister, the wife of this man, died), is the true reason why she suffers. She recovers and that's that.
Freud ends his description of the case of Fraulein Elisabeth von R. with the following peculiar, but typical passage:
"In the spring of 1894, I heard that she was going to a private ball for which I was able to get an invitation, and I did not allow the opportunity to escape me of seeing my former patient whirl past in a lively dance. Since then, by her own inclination, she has married someone unknown to me." (p. 160)
(A smilar case study, on a certain 'Katharina' explains how, when Freud is walking in the mountains, the daughter of the woman who rents the room of the inn where Freud stays asks for a doctor. She explains she has hysterical symptoms; Freud asks her intimate questions: and lo and behold! the reason for the hysteria is discovered - the girl was sexually assaulted by her uncle, who she later saw raping her cousin, and the repressed ideas about these experiences are treated and the girl is healed.)
It is very hard to give a fair hearing when reading such ridiculous nonsense. And I think we should rather treat it like that: nonsense.
Freud was an oversexed fantast; an intellectual who couldn't rid himself of the Victorian upper-class view on women; and a pseudo-scientist who saw the unconsciousness as the cause of almost every detail of our mental world. The unconsciousness either respresses or accepts ideas; and this either leads to hysteria or to a healthy learning experience. The problem with all this is that it makes for good literature, but bad science. Freud's theories are so vague, all-encompassing and (especially) untestable that it is very hard to see why they have been so influential....
To end this review: I have to credit Joseph Breuer for intellectual honesty. When Freud started to interpret hysteria in a primarily sexual way, Breuer parted with Freud. So one has at least to give Breuer credit for trying to develop a new experimental method of treating patients with neurological symptoms - a noble goal. Freud took it and ran off with it.
So, read this book as a historical (and hysterical) document, and keep in mind that hysteria isn't a classified diagnosis anymore; psychoanalysis isn't a legitimate treatment anymore; Freud's theories aren't scientifically accepted anymore.
November 14, 2025
فروید همراه با بروئر این کتاب رو نوشت. اثری که میشه گفت تاریخ روانکاوی به نوعی از اون شروع شد.
من بیشتر از همه بخش شرح حال های اثر رو دوست داشتم.(مخصوصاً قلم فروید رو که انگار داشتی داستان میخوندی.)
بیماری هیستری همیشه برای من عجیب بوده و با خوندن کیسهای مرتبط با هیستری همش این فکر ته ذهنم میاد که انگار این افراد به طور کلی داخل دنیای دیگهای زندگی میکردن.
در این کتاب به خوبی فروید اولیه رو مشاهده میکنید. شخصی که تازه داشت با دنیای ذهنی آدمی آشنا میشد و هنوز به اون فرویدی که ما فکر میکنیم تبدیل نشده بود و تا حدودی از روش هیپنوتیزم برای درمان بیمارانش استفاده میکرد.
کتاب به طور کلی خوندش برای من راحت بود فقط بخش نظری که توسط بروئر نوشته شده بود یکم برام سخت و غیرقابل فهم بود.(بنظرم نوشتههای فروید خیلی جذابتر بودن مخصوصاً جاهایی که کیسهای خودش رو شرح میداد.)
این اثر برای فهم هیستری و درک تکامل فروید و اینکه منشأ روانکاوی از کجا شکل گرفت بسیار مفید و خوندنی هست.
من بیشتر از همه بخش شرح حال های اثر رو دوست داشتم.(مخصوصاً قلم فروید رو که انگار داشتی داستان میخوندی.)
بیماری هیستری همیشه برای من عجیب بوده و با خوندن کیسهای مرتبط با هیستری همش این فکر ته ذهنم میاد که انگار این افراد به طور کلی داخل دنیای دیگهای زندگی میکردن.
در این کتاب به خوبی فروید اولیه رو مشاهده میکنید. شخصی که تازه داشت با دنیای ذهنی آدمی آشنا میشد و هنوز به اون فرویدی که ما فکر میکنیم تبدیل نشده بود و تا حدودی از روش هیپنوتیزم برای درمان بیمارانش استفاده میکرد.
کتاب به طور کلی خوندش برای من راحت بود فقط بخش نظری که توسط بروئر نوشته شده بود یکم برام سخت و غیرقابل فهم بود.(بنظرم نوشتههای فروید خیلی جذابتر بودن مخصوصاً جاهایی که کیسهای خودش رو شرح میداد.)
این اثر برای فهم هیستری و درک تکامل فروید و اینکه منشأ روانکاوی از کجا شکل گرفت بسیار مفید و خوندنی هست.
December 20, 2025
Someone tell me how Freud has stayed more relevant than most of the Kardashians. Read for my dissertation. Crazy how wild some of the theories are in the book and how misogynistic they are but also some degree of truth?? Anyway really good quotes to use for my Louise bourgeois chapter.
January 24, 2021
Hay un viaje y una evolución tremenda en este libro. Partiendo de su colaboración con Bauer, en la aplicación del método catártico y de la hipnosis en la cura de la histeria, Freud trasciende esto y diseña las líneas principales del psicoanálisis, incidiendo en la cura psicoanalítica a través del recuerdo y la libre asociación del paciente; a dejar que este dimensione su recuerdo: a la doble labor tan diferente, de terapeuta y paciente; al desarrollo incipiente de la teoría sexual; a la transferencia; e incluso a la esctructura de la psique y al inconsciente; así como al uso del relato y a la duda sobre su propias convicciones como forma metodológica.
Un libro que, en cuanto a los casos, se lee como una obra de ficción apasionante, con ribetes de relato detectivesco, y que en cuanto al aparato teórico es accesible y de una gran profundidad.
Un libro que, en cuanto a los casos, se lee como una obra de ficción apasionante, con ribetes de relato detectivesco, y que en cuanto al aparato teórico es accesible y de una gran profundidad.
September 14, 2022
کتاب با جملهی شاهکاری از فروید رو به بیمارش به پایان میرسد: با درمان هیستری تو از بیچارگی هیستری رها میشوی و دچار بدبختی زندگی روزمره میشوی که با اعصاب بازیافته بهتر میتوانی با آن بجنگی.
به هر روی هیچ گریزی از بدبختی زندگی نیست.
به هر روی هیچ گریزی از بدبختی زندگی نیست.
Want to read
March 18, 2012To-Read: "The five case studies are like short stories."
September 20, 2018
Très intéressant mais pour pour quelqu'un qui n'est pas français un peu difficile à lire
June 14, 2022
um genio. incrível ver a psicanálise se desenvolvendo p chegar ao que eh hoje e freud sendo genial desde sempre e eternamente.
March 30, 2019
This book (and the methods of psychoanalysis that it inaugerates) worked to dispell or, perhaps better, to rewrite two fundamental myths about madness (or what we might now term 'mental illness') and psychic life. The first of these is the misconception that madness only affects deranged or mentally unstable individuals. Freud and Breuer's work evinces the normalcy of such disfunctioning psychic processes by tracing them to their origins, and disclosing how such disruptions function and come about. The possibility of madness haunts us all, for it is woven into and traced through the very norms of ego functioning.
And this leads us to the second, and perhaps more valuable, insight that this worl uncovers - the fictive or inscriptive workings of consciousness in play with the unconscious. For the ego is not an autochthonous or self-grounding existence. Rather, it is a production, a fiction inscribed through the appropraition and assimilation of unconscious or anonymous drives, forces, or affects. These are inscribed narrativistically to memories, written into conscious events, so as to 'make sense' of existence, to stabilize a meaningful world-complex. But when faced with trauma, forces which threaten the sensible order of conscious operations, the affect and its attendant memory are repressed, encrypted into the unsconscious - they are buried alive.
But the living entombed do not die silently nor peacefully, and because the ego is structured upon and written from out of the matrix of unconscious forces, the repressed and encrypted force wells up and haunts the functioning life of the ego. This parasitic haunting is not the infectious affectation of a foreign invader, however, but instead is the ungrounding force of the other within the same, and the wound that splits consciousness is one that always already exists, latently covered over and silenced, but never healed.
The work of analysis, then, is not to dispell some infectious agent, to bolster and solidify the stability of the ego. Analysis aims to bring consciousness to bear upon its origins, to submit it to the deathly affects of creative-destruction which it unconsciously employs in its functioning. The disfunction of the ego is not reinscribed into the ego as much as the ego is reinscribed into its other, opened to the unconscious, anonymous affects upon which it is founded and through which it is written. The language through which consciousness weaves its narratives is not its own, and thought is an anonymous force.
As the above suggests, I agree with Lacan in the misguided misreading of psychoanalysis as an ego-therapy, though without wholly taking on or affirming Lacanian methods and explanations. The importance of Freud for tradition falls to what he has opened us to - the origins of our ficticity, and the ficticity of origins; the anonymous and impersonal element which underwrites our conscious life; and the function that language and writing plays in dealing with disfunctions in conscious life. We do not need to relieve ourselves of mental disfunction, unless by this we understand relief as relève (playing off of Derrida's relever), to relive and re-survey the subterranean mental occurences, and to rework consciousness in the sense of an Aufhebung - to reinscribe consciousness by returning it to its alterity, forcing it to face up to this insider, this outside force which parasitically perverts it, prevents it from ever being the fiction it took itself to be, and thus forcing it to see itself as other-than-itself - as the mimetic fiction that it always already was.
The autopoetic fictioning of the ego does not write from out of nothing, but employs the trace affects of the anonymous forces which underwrite it. To forget this transcendental unconscious is a hubristic folly which aggravates a reaction, inciting an unconscious force demanding reccollection and reinscription. The true madness, perhaps, is the forgetting of what we are, and where we come from. As artificers, we are not omnipotent, for we must not forget that we are artificial as well - fictioning fictions grounded in an abyss. Consciousness does not fully capture and encapsulate all that we are. Lest we forget, and though we may endeavour to forget, the immemorial always remembers.
And this leads us to the second, and perhaps more valuable, insight that this worl uncovers - the fictive or inscriptive workings of consciousness in play with the unconscious. For the ego is not an autochthonous or self-grounding existence. Rather, it is a production, a fiction inscribed through the appropraition and assimilation of unconscious or anonymous drives, forces, or affects. These are inscribed narrativistically to memories, written into conscious events, so as to 'make sense' of existence, to stabilize a meaningful world-complex. But when faced with trauma, forces which threaten the sensible order of conscious operations, the affect and its attendant memory are repressed, encrypted into the unsconscious - they are buried alive.
But the living entombed do not die silently nor peacefully, and because the ego is structured upon and written from out of the matrix of unconscious forces, the repressed and encrypted force wells up and haunts the functioning life of the ego. This parasitic haunting is not the infectious affectation of a foreign invader, however, but instead is the ungrounding force of the other within the same, and the wound that splits consciousness is one that always already exists, latently covered over and silenced, but never healed.
The work of analysis, then, is not to dispell some infectious agent, to bolster and solidify the stability of the ego. Analysis aims to bring consciousness to bear upon its origins, to submit it to the deathly affects of creative-destruction which it unconsciously employs in its functioning. The disfunction of the ego is not reinscribed into the ego as much as the ego is reinscribed into its other, opened to the unconscious, anonymous affects upon which it is founded and through which it is written. The language through which consciousness weaves its narratives is not its own, and thought is an anonymous force.
As the above suggests, I agree with Lacan in the misguided misreading of psychoanalysis as an ego-therapy, though without wholly taking on or affirming Lacanian methods and explanations. The importance of Freud for tradition falls to what he has opened us to - the origins of our ficticity, and the ficticity of origins; the anonymous and impersonal element which underwrites our conscious life; and the function that language and writing plays in dealing with disfunctions in conscious life. We do not need to relieve ourselves of mental disfunction, unless by this we understand relief as relève (playing off of Derrida's relever), to relive and re-survey the subterranean mental occurences, and to rework consciousness in the sense of an Aufhebung - to reinscribe consciousness by returning it to its alterity, forcing it to face up to this insider, this outside force which parasitically perverts it, prevents it from ever being the fiction it took itself to be, and thus forcing it to see itself as other-than-itself - as the mimetic fiction that it always already was.
The autopoetic fictioning of the ego does not write from out of nothing, but employs the trace affects of the anonymous forces which underwrite it. To forget this transcendental unconscious is a hubristic folly which aggravates a reaction, inciting an unconscious force demanding reccollection and reinscription. The true madness, perhaps, is the forgetting of what we are, and where we come from. As artificers, we are not omnipotent, for we must not forget that we are artificial as well - fictioning fictions grounded in an abyss. Consciousness does not fully capture and encapsulate all that we are. Lest we forget, and though we may endeavour to forget, the immemorial always remembers.
October 14, 2022
Freud's first major work explores many of the crucial ideas of this period of his thought: the therapeutic model of abreaction, the mechanism of hysterical symptom formation and the more general connection between neurosis and sexuality, and intimations of free association, the unconscious, and resistance and defense. This presentation of these ideas is flawed when taken in the light of Freud's later work, and those flaws are productively acted out.
Yet this book is not merely "pre-psychoanalytic;" some have taken this book to represent a relatively understudied "trauma" model of mental illness having some relation to the reappraised work of Pierre Janet. I wonder whether Breuer's contributions also deserve reconsideration: his caution and tact as a thinker seems to serve not only as a formative influence on Freud's development, but also as a model (more than Freud, perhaps) for psychoanalytic thought. As Breuer once said of himself to Fliess, "it is just that in all my opinions and actions, the thought occurs to me that everything might perhaps be quite different from the way I assume it to be."
The case studies are probably the most famous and most frequently read part of the book, and deservedly so; even if one were to read them like "short stories" (which Freud himself ponders), they have much to offer. But if they are not properly situated, they can only lead to misunderstandings over theory, technique, and especially gender. Perhaps changing social mores have turned this into Freud's most controversial and provocative book to today's readers. But one should ask some simple, honest questions: were any of these five women helped by Freud and Breuer? No, but maybe also yes. Was anything learned from these studies on hysteria? Absolutely.
Yet this book is not merely "pre-psychoanalytic;" some have taken this book to represent a relatively understudied "trauma" model of mental illness having some relation to the reappraised work of Pierre Janet. I wonder whether Breuer's contributions also deserve reconsideration: his caution and tact as a thinker seems to serve not only as a formative influence on Freud's development, but also as a model (more than Freud, perhaps) for psychoanalytic thought. As Breuer once said of himself to Fliess, "it is just that in all my opinions and actions, the thought occurs to me that everything might perhaps be quite different from the way I assume it to be."
The case studies are probably the most famous and most frequently read part of the book, and deservedly so; even if one were to read them like "short stories" (which Freud himself ponders), they have much to offer. But if they are not properly situated, they can only lead to misunderstandings over theory, technique, and especially gender. Perhaps changing social mores have turned this into Freud's most controversial and provocative book to today's readers. But one should ask some simple, honest questions: were any of these five women helped by Freud and Breuer? No, but maybe also yes. Was anything learned from these studies on hysteria? Absolutely.
June 2, 2025
early freud delving into hypnotism and gradually inventing psychoanalysis is like, so so fascinating. love reading the case studies
January 1, 2025
2.5/5
I don't want to talk about how much Freud I was forced to read this semester....
I don't want to talk about how much Freud I was forced to read this semester....
August 2, 2020
Interesantes aportes del padre de la Psicología. Aunque no todo es 100% como lo escribió, sin dudas su obra marcó un antes y un después.
November 14, 2022
"Hysteria? Isn't that, like, in the 19th century, when women had feelings, we made them masturbate and/or Yellow Wallpaper'd them?" Not in this book!
The first of many pleasant surprises: Freud and Breuer treat their patients with a great deal of respect. "Hysteria" for them is a non-gendered mental condition, where unprocessed trauma is expressed in one or more physical symptoms. They argue that its occurrence is not a result of some supposed "feminine weakness," and that their patients are in fact highly intelligent and mentally active. Intriguingly, Breuer suggests that hysteria often occurs in women because they are assigned as family caretakers for the elderly: they are expected to be entirely involved in someone else's concerns, and they are given no acceptable outlet for their own emotions.
Well, there's a lot of interesting stuff in here, and I can't cover all of it. Of course they don't get everything right, and they get a couple things very wrong (sorry about your erased memories, Emmy) but given that the state of the art in the 19th century was hypnotizing people, you gotta give them credit for coming up with something that is recognizably the beginning of modern psychology. Freud's part IV is probably the highlight, where he formalizes an idea we now take for granted: the psychological defense!
The first of many pleasant surprises: Freud and Breuer treat their patients with a great deal of respect. "Hysteria" for them is a non-gendered mental condition, where unprocessed trauma is expressed in one or more physical symptoms. They argue that its occurrence is not a result of some supposed "feminine weakness," and that their patients are in fact highly intelligent and mentally active. Intriguingly, Breuer suggests that hysteria often occurs in women because they are assigned as family caretakers for the elderly: they are expected to be entirely involved in someone else's concerns, and they are given no acceptable outlet for their own emotions.
Well, there's a lot of interesting stuff in here, and I can't cover all of it. Of course they don't get everything right, and they get a couple things very wrong (sorry about your erased memories, Emmy) but given that the state of the art in the 19th century was hypnotizing people, you gotta give them credit for coming up with something that is recognizably the beginning of modern psychology. Freud's part IV is probably the highlight, where he formalizes an idea we now take for granted: the psychological defense!
October 14, 2014
Excelente tomo en cual se ilustra la manera de como se va formando la técnica psicoanalítica, empezando por la hipnosis hasta la asociación libre. A la vez muestra como las pacientes van dando la pauta para su propio tratamiento; el nacimiento de la "talking cure" con Anna O. y como Freud va dando cuenta de la importancia del lenguaje y como el inconsciente se manifiesta por medio de la palabra.
February 14, 2008
So far so good - I mean, I don't agree with most of his theory since he always positions women as secondary and bases women's issues on repressed sexuality, but that's why I like the book - it is helping me come up with a theory to bash his to bits. Rock on!
April 25, 2024
Anna O. girlies
August 30, 2017
In Studies in Hysteria, Joseph Breuer and Sigmund Freud offer case studies of women afflicted with an illness, hysteria, no longer recognized as a single illness. This volume, then, is a labored, sober, self-doubting attempt to conduct science clinically, woman by woman, patient by patient, afflicted by a wide array of symptoms: loss of hearing, loss of the ability to speak in one's native language, loss of movement in a limb, persistent coughing, lassitude, mood swings, paranoia, inability to recognize the presence of someone whose presence in a room doesn't figure in the disorder of consciousness.
Hysteria viewed in these terms differs from the hysteria explored by Jean-Martin Charcot, the French neurologist under whom Freud studied for four months. Charcot's patients exhibited a fairly typical cycle of exceptional symptoms that he did not so much attempt to treat as observe and document.
Studies in Hysteria launches psychoanalysis with Breuer's successful cure of Miss Anna O by means of what she herself called the "talking cure" under hypnosis. What is striking, and central to Freud's elaboration, is the conviction that if an hysteric could be induced to revisit a primal trauma, said hysteric could, like dropping a handkerchief or hitting a ping pong ball, dispose of her (usually her) difficulties.
Neither Breuer nor Freud claim to be certain about all this. They do not have an answer as to why some women become "hysterics" while most do not. In many case studies, they describe therapeutic events more than analyze them. It's always apparent that what worked best for them, scientifically, was logic in the form of post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this therefore because of this). Similarly, it's apparent that they knew they were working in darkness.
Freud, in particular, approaches his case studies much as a literary writer would. He is painstaking in establishing causes and effects on character and a narrative/biographical understanding of personality (in the very limited context of hysteria, not more broadly.)
This is early Freud, and in many ways it is appealing Freud. He subsequently rose to such great fame and such great criticism that it's useful to encounter him as an observing clinician. As medical doctors, Breuer and Freud first worked to assure themselves that there was no identifiable medical cause of hysterical afflictions--at least none known to the science of the day. But they then were left with inexplicable afflictions, and the question of what to do about them.
For whatever reason, Freud was no good at hypnosis, so he developed a technique of applying pressure to a patient's head with his hands and using that intrusion to jar the patient into entering the labyrinth of associations that would lead to the original insult. One sees him as authoritarian in this method, but he freely confesses failures, dead-ends, and frustrations, which he says the physician simply must accept. But he is convinced that the patient knows what is bothering her, that it can be rescued from repression, and that once it is revealed, it will vanish.
Today much of what Freud dealt with would fall under the category of sexual abuse or a form of PTSD. It might also be subjected to brain scans, and it might be treated by medications. Beyond abuse, the shame factor plays large in Freud's social context (a much more restrictive context than today's, which isn't to say say shame, embarrassment, or guilt are not fierce forces throughout human experience.) Clearly,he and his patients defined health as fitting back into "normalcy," a social construct.
I had a specific reason for wanting to read this turgid, repetitive book to the end. That probably is necessary for any reader, some specific motive. It's early mind science; some of it seems weird but much of it can easily be rephrased into today's problems, terminologies, and treatments. The redescription of a phenomenon does not eliminate or totally invalidate it. Terrible things happen to some people and yet they go on relatively unscathed while others become locked in the death grip of obsession or depression or repetition compulsions. Breuer and Freud knew they were clinicians practicing weak science, even by the standards of their day. The fascinating thing in Freud's case is that his early clinical work led to an incredible variety of theoretical and scientific insights, many of which are now considered doubtful but all of which were provocative.
Hysteria viewed in these terms differs from the hysteria explored by Jean-Martin Charcot, the French neurologist under whom Freud studied for four months. Charcot's patients exhibited a fairly typical cycle of exceptional symptoms that he did not so much attempt to treat as observe and document.
Studies in Hysteria launches psychoanalysis with Breuer's successful cure of Miss Anna O by means of what she herself called the "talking cure" under hypnosis. What is striking, and central to Freud's elaboration, is the conviction that if an hysteric could be induced to revisit a primal trauma, said hysteric could, like dropping a handkerchief or hitting a ping pong ball, dispose of her (usually her) difficulties.
Neither Breuer nor Freud claim to be certain about all this. They do not have an answer as to why some women become "hysterics" while most do not. In many case studies, they describe therapeutic events more than analyze them. It's always apparent that what worked best for them, scientifically, was logic in the form of post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this therefore because of this). Similarly, it's apparent that they knew they were working in darkness.
Freud, in particular, approaches his case studies much as a literary writer would. He is painstaking in establishing causes and effects on character and a narrative/biographical understanding of personality (in the very limited context of hysteria, not more broadly.)
This is early Freud, and in many ways it is appealing Freud. He subsequently rose to such great fame and such great criticism that it's useful to encounter him as an observing clinician. As medical doctors, Breuer and Freud first worked to assure themselves that there was no identifiable medical cause of hysterical afflictions--at least none known to the science of the day. But they then were left with inexplicable afflictions, and the question of what to do about them.
For whatever reason, Freud was no good at hypnosis, so he developed a technique of applying pressure to a patient's head with his hands and using that intrusion to jar the patient into entering the labyrinth of associations that would lead to the original insult. One sees him as authoritarian in this method, but he freely confesses failures, dead-ends, and frustrations, which he says the physician simply must accept. But he is convinced that the patient knows what is bothering her, that it can be rescued from repression, and that once it is revealed, it will vanish.
Today much of what Freud dealt with would fall under the category of sexual abuse or a form of PTSD. It might also be subjected to brain scans, and it might be treated by medications. Beyond abuse, the shame factor plays large in Freud's social context (a much more restrictive context than today's, which isn't to say say shame, embarrassment, or guilt are not fierce forces throughout human experience.) Clearly,he and his patients defined health as fitting back into "normalcy," a social construct.
I had a specific reason for wanting to read this turgid, repetitive book to the end. That probably is necessary for any reader, some specific motive. It's early mind science; some of it seems weird but much of it can easily be rephrased into today's problems, terminologies, and treatments. The redescription of a phenomenon does not eliminate or totally invalidate it. Terrible things happen to some people and yet they go on relatively unscathed while others become locked in the death grip of obsession or depression or repetition compulsions. Breuer and Freud knew they were clinicians practicing weak science, even by the standards of their day. The fascinating thing in Freud's case is that his early clinical work led to an incredible variety of theoretical and scientific insights, many of which are now considered doubtful but all of which were provocative.
January 15, 2026
"In the course of our therapeutic work, we have been led to the view that hysteria originates through the repression of an incompatible idea from a motive of defence. On this view, the repressed idea would persist as a memory trace that is weak (has little intensity), while the affect that is torn from it would be used for a somatic innervation. (That is, the excitation is ‘converted’.) It would seem, then, that it is precisely through its repression that the idea becomes the cause of morbid symptoms - that is to say, becomes pathogenic."
"I have described such groupings of similar memories into collections arranged in linear sequences (like a file of documents, a packet, etc.) as constituting ‘themes’. These themes exhibit a second kind of arrangement. Each of them is - I can not express it in any other way - stratified concentrically round the pathogenic nucleus...The contents of each particular stratum are characterized by an equal degree of resistance, and that degree increases in proportion as the strata are nearer to the nucleus....The most peripheral strata contain the memories (or files), which, belonging to different themes, are easily remembered and have always been clearly conscious. The deeper we go the more difficult it becomes for the emerging memories to be recognized, till near the nucleus we come upon memories which the patient disavows even in reproducing them."
"It is easy to imagine how complicated a work of this kind can become. We force our way into the internal strata, overcoming resistances all the time; we get to know the themes accumulated in one of these strata and the threads running through it, and we experiment how far we can advance with our present means and the knowledge we have acquired; we obtain preliminary information about the contents of the next strata by means of the pressure technique; we drop threads and pick them up again; we follow them as far as nodal points; we are constantly making up arrears; and every time that we pursue a file of memories we are led to some side-path, which nevertheless eventually joins up again. By this method we at last reach a point at which we can stop working in strata and can penetrate by a main path straight to the nucleus of the pathogenic organization. With this the struggle is won, though not yet ended. We must go back and take up the other threads and exhaust the material. But now the patient helps us energetically. His resistance is for the most part broken."
"When I have promised my patients help or improvement by means of a cathartic treatment I have often been faced by this objection: ‘Why, you tell me yourself that my illness is probably connected with my circumstances and the events of my life. You cannot alter these in any way. How do you propose to help me, then?’ And I have been able to make this reply: ‘No doubt fate would find it easier than I do to relieve you of your illness. But you will be able to convince yourself that much will be gained if we succeed in transforming your hysterical misery into common unhappiness. With a mental life that has been restored to health you will be better armed against that unhappiness.’"
"I have described such groupings of similar memories into collections arranged in linear sequences (like a file of documents, a packet, etc.) as constituting ‘themes’. These themes exhibit a second kind of arrangement. Each of them is - I can not express it in any other way - stratified concentrically round the pathogenic nucleus...The contents of each particular stratum are characterized by an equal degree of resistance, and that degree increases in proportion as the strata are nearer to the nucleus....The most peripheral strata contain the memories (or files), which, belonging to different themes, are easily remembered and have always been clearly conscious. The deeper we go the more difficult it becomes for the emerging memories to be recognized, till near the nucleus we come upon memories which the patient disavows even in reproducing them."
"It is easy to imagine how complicated a work of this kind can become. We force our way into the internal strata, overcoming resistances all the time; we get to know the themes accumulated in one of these strata and the threads running through it, and we experiment how far we can advance with our present means and the knowledge we have acquired; we obtain preliminary information about the contents of the next strata by means of the pressure technique; we drop threads and pick them up again; we follow them as far as nodal points; we are constantly making up arrears; and every time that we pursue a file of memories we are led to some side-path, which nevertheless eventually joins up again. By this method we at last reach a point at which we can stop working in strata and can penetrate by a main path straight to the nucleus of the pathogenic organization. With this the struggle is won, though not yet ended. We must go back and take up the other threads and exhaust the material. But now the patient helps us energetically. His resistance is for the most part broken."
"When I have promised my patients help or improvement by means of a cathartic treatment I have often been faced by this objection: ‘Why, you tell me yourself that my illness is probably connected with my circumstances and the events of my life. You cannot alter these in any way. How do you propose to help me, then?’ And I have been able to make this reply: ‘No doubt fate would find it easier than I do to relieve you of your illness. But you will be able to convince yourself that much will be gained if we succeed in transforming your hysterical misery into common unhappiness. With a mental life that has been restored to health you will be better armed against that unhappiness.’"
January 18, 2026
Escrever meu TCC sobre Estudos sobre a Histeria não foi apenas uma escolha acadêmica; foi o momento em que entendi que a psicologia nasce onde a medicina falha. Ao mergulhar na relação entre Freud, Breuer e Charcot, percebi que a históoria da nossa clínica começa com um ato de humildade: parar de olhar para o corpo como uma máquina quebrada e começar a escutá-lo como um narrador desesperado.
O que me prendeu nessa pesquisa foi a ideia de que o sintoma histérico nada mais é do que uma memória que não conseguiu virar palavra. No meu trabalho, explorei como Charcot via o "teatro" dos ataques convulsivos e das "atitudes passionais", mas foi Freud quem teve a coragem de dizer que aquele corpo contorcido estava, na verdade, defendendo-se de uma "reminiscência". A frase "o histérico sofre de reminiscências" ecoou em cada página que escrevi, porque ela resume a tragédia humana de ficar preso em um passado que se recusa a passar, transformando traumas afetivos em paralisias, cegueira ou mudez.
O caso de Anna O., que analisei a fundo, foi o divisor de águas. Ver uma mulher brilhante, capaz de falar inglês enquanto esquecia o alemão, criando um "teatro privado" para escapar da monotonia e da dor de cuidar do pai doente, me mostrou a força assustadora do inconsciente. Breuer chamou de "limpeza de chaminé", mas o que eles descobriram ali foi a "cura pela fala". Foi fascinante traçar como o método catártico provou que, quando a emoção reprimida (o afeto estrangulado) finalmente ganha voz, o sintoma desaparece.
Meu TCC foi a confirmação de que escolhi essa profissão porque, assim como Freud rompeu com a visão simplista da hereditariedade para encarar a complexidade da sexualidade e do trauma infantil, eu também quero ter a coragem de ouvir o que é "indizível". Saio dessa pesquisa entendendo que a histeria não é um fingimento, mas uma verdade insuportável que o corpo grita quando a boca se cala. E meu papel, afinal, era ser aquela que escuta.
O que me prendeu nessa pesquisa foi a ideia de que o sintoma histérico nada mais é do que uma memória que não conseguiu virar palavra. No meu trabalho, explorei como Charcot via o "teatro" dos ataques convulsivos e das "atitudes passionais", mas foi Freud quem teve a coragem de dizer que aquele corpo contorcido estava, na verdade, defendendo-se de uma "reminiscência". A frase "o histérico sofre de reminiscências" ecoou em cada página que escrevi, porque ela resume a tragédia humana de ficar preso em um passado que se recusa a passar, transformando traumas afetivos em paralisias, cegueira ou mudez.
O caso de Anna O., que analisei a fundo, foi o divisor de águas. Ver uma mulher brilhante, capaz de falar inglês enquanto esquecia o alemão, criando um "teatro privado" para escapar da monotonia e da dor de cuidar do pai doente, me mostrou a força assustadora do inconsciente. Breuer chamou de "limpeza de chaminé", mas o que eles descobriram ali foi a "cura pela fala". Foi fascinante traçar como o método catártico provou que, quando a emoção reprimida (o afeto estrangulado) finalmente ganha voz, o sintoma desaparece.
Meu TCC foi a confirmação de que escolhi essa profissão porque, assim como Freud rompeu com a visão simplista da hereditariedade para encarar a complexidade da sexualidade e do trauma infantil, eu também quero ter a coragem de ouvir o que é "indizível". Saio dessa pesquisa entendendo que a histeria não é um fingimento, mas uma verdade insuportável que o corpo grita quando a boca se cala. E meu papel, afinal, era ser aquela que escuta.
December 2, 2023
“Freud (1893-1895) - Studies on Hysteria” published by @Companiadasletras is the second book published by the Father of Psychoanalysis, and is possibly his first foray into this science. With the help of Joseph Breuer, another Viennese psychologist, Freud follows five cases of patients diagnosed with Hysteria. “Hystera” in Greek means “uterus”, implying that this condition of psychological imbalance had only to do with the female sex. Freud and Breuer investigate the somatic psychic origins that manifest themselves in different ways in each patient and develop the theory of 'Division of the mind' (and not of consciousness), in which they argue that certain ideas are 'inadmissible to consciousness' and cannot be influenced by conscious ideas. Thus, most people who suffer from depression, for example, cannot be cured just by taking antidepressants or being forced to 'think' positively, the source of their depression has to be brought to the threshold of consciousness, through 'talking'. The way he reached his conclusions, however, was absurdly intuitive, which makes me question some of his conclusions. He made extensive use of suggestion and hypnosis with his patients, techniques he had learned from the mesmerizer Jean-Martin Charcot (about 8 years earlier) who had impressed upon him that all mental disorders were associated with the genitals. Quite possibly for this reason, Freud ends up seeing the sexual repression of his patients as the reason for their unbalanced condition. It is incredible to follow in Freud's own words the development of his perception of the human psyche, even if, at times, it is possibly mistaken.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 77 reviews