Freudian/Lacanian Support for H/H (long)

[naama]

No: HPFGUIDX 7322

--- In HPforGrownups at egroups.com, "Ebony " <ebonyink at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at egroups.com, "naama " <naama_gat at h...> wrote:
> >  The point here is not that Carroll was not neurotic (we 
> > all know he was), but that books of nonsense fantasy for chidren 
> are 
> > not such fruitful sources of psychoanalytic insight as one might 
> > suppose them to be. They are much too rich in symbols. The 
symbols 
> > have too many explanation." 
> 
> The only problem is, Carroll *was* writing nonsense on purpose, and 
> JKR is not.  His keen wit and satirical devices can't be 
paralleled.  
> Carroll's art shares many characteristics of Edward Lear's... 
another 
> eccentric Victorian writer often read by children.
> 
> And I mentioned earlier that I usually *hate* psychoanalytic 
> criticism.  I agree that some of it borders on the ridiculous.  The 
> minute I read about Hermione's Divination experience in PoA, I 
> related it to my own experiences with psychology.  I can only 
> tolerate the stuff when it serves my purposes... and it happens to 
do 
> so in this case  :)
> 
> However, it *has* had profound influence on modern critical theory. 
 
> Without Freud, much of twentieth-century psychology, philosophy, 
and 
> literary criticism would be quite different.  I try to keep that in 
> mind.
> 
> ==Ebony

Oh, I agree completely (about the importance of Freud to twentieth 
century thought). I see the quote as just a wise warning against 
rigid overanalysis. 

Naama