I
Shoshana Felman het Frans doseer aan Yale vanaf 1970 – 2004. Tans gee sy Frans en Vergelykende Letterkunde aan Emory Universiteit. Behalwe vir haar werk in psigoanalise, het sy studies oor die Holocaust en trauma geskryf.
Die titel van Felman se studie What Does a Woman Want? Reading and Sexual Difference (1993) verwys na ‘n brief tussen Freud en Prinses Marie Bonaparte (1882 – 1962), die Franse skrywer en psigoanalis. Wat wil die vrou?
In Felman se studie ondersoek sy outobiografiese tekste van Virginia Woolf, Simone de Beauvoir en Adrienne Rich. Sy bespreek twee verhale van Balzac (“Adieu” en “The Girl with the Golden Eyes”) en Freud se analise van Irma. Die twee klassieke verhale word in die bron vermeld.
Sy skryf teen Freud se patriargale orde in dat die vrou se begeerte deur die man “vertaal” of interpreteer word.
Vroue is resisting readers en sy meen dat die outobiografiese teks ‘n nuwe geboorte impliseer. In my lesing van Balzac se “Adieu” gaan ek akkoord met Felman dat die vrou die minnaar teengaan. Miskien is waansin in hierdie verhaal die enigste ruimte waar sy die patriargale orde kan troef?
Felman neem my terug na Freud se beroemde Irma-droom.
II
In die somer van 1895 is daar ‘n vrou wat Freud besoek: ene Irma.
Freud teken sy droom as volg op:
Julie 23 1895
A large hall – numerous guests, whom we were receiving. – Among them was Irma. I at once took her to one side, as though to answer her letter and to reproach her for not having accepted my ‘solution’ yet. I said to her: ‘If you still get pains, it’s really only your fault.’ She replies: ‘If you only knew what pains I’ve got now in my throat and stomach and abdomen – it’s choking me.’ – I was alarmed and looked at her. She looked pale and puffy. I thought to myself that after all I must be missing some organic trouble. I took her to the window and looked down her throat, and she showed signs of recalcitrance, like women with artificial dentures. I thought to myself that there was really no need for her to do that. She then opened her mouth properly and on the right I found a big white patch; at another place I saw extensive whitish grey scabs upon some remarkable curly structures which were evidently modelled on the turbinal bones of the nose. – I at once called in Dr M., and he repeated the examination and confirmed it … Dr M. looked quite different from usual; he was very pale, he walked with a limp and his chin was clean-shaven … My friend Otto was now standing beside her as well, and my friend Leopold was percussing her through her bodice and saying: ‘She has a dull area low down on the left.’ He also indicated that a portion of the skin on her left shoulder was infiltrated. (I noticed this, just as he did, in spite of her dress.) … M. said: ‘There’s no doubt it’s an infection, but no matter; dysentery will supervene and the toxin will be eliminated. … We were directly aware, too, of the origin of the infection. Not long before, when she was feeling unwell, my friend Otto had given her an injection of a preparation of propyl, propyls … propionic acid … trimethylamin (and I saw before me the formula for this printed in heavy type) … Injections of this sort ought not to be given so thoughtlessly … And probably the syringe had not been clean.
Interpretation of dreams (182).
Hierdie analise is van Slavoj Žižek:
The dream begins with a conversation between Freud and his patient Irma about the failure of her treatment because of an infection caused by an injection. In the course of the conversation, Freud approaches her and looks deep into her mouth. He is confronted with the unpleasant sight of scabs and curly structures like nasal bones. At this point, the horror suddenly changes to comedy. Three doctors, friends of Freud, among them one called Otto, appear and begin to enumerate, in ridiculous pseudo-professional jargon, possible (and mutually exclusive) causes of Irma’s infection. If anyone had been to blame, it transpires in the dream, it is Otto, because he gave Irma the injection: ‘Injections ought not to be made so thoughtlessly,’ the doctors conclude, ‘and probably the syringe had not been clean.’ So, the ‘latent thought’ articulated in the dream is neither sexual nor unconscious, but Freud’s fully conscious wish to absolve himself of responsibility for the failure of Irma’s treatment. How does this fit with the thesis that dreams manifest unconscious sexual desires?
En verder skryf hy:
However, the dream presents a further enigma: whose desire does it manifest? Recent commentaries clearly establish that the true motivation behind the dream was Freud’s desire to absolve Fliess, his close friend and collaborator, of responsibility and guilt. It was Fliess who botched Irma’s nose operation, and the dream’s desire is not to exculpate Freud himself, but his friend, who was, at this point, Freud’s ‘subject supposed to know’, the object of his transference. The dream dramatises his wish to show that Fliess wasn’t responsible for the medical failure, that he wasn’t lacking in knowledge. The dream does manifest Freud’s desire – but only insofar as his desire is already the Other’s (Fliess’s) desire.
En ten slotte:
In this precise sense, as Lacan put it, the Truth has the structure of a fiction: what appears in the guise of dreaming, or even daydreaming, is sometimes the truth on whose repression social reality itself is founded. Therein resides the ultimate lesson of The Interpretation of Dreams: reality is for those who cannot sustain the dream.
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v28/n10/slavoj-zizek/freud-lives Besoek 7 Oktober 2022
III
Freud lewe en psigoanalise is nie dood nie argumenteer Žižek.
Droom
Ná ‘n dwaalreis meteens dié bekende straat,
dié oggendtuin met krismisrose, kappertjies en die geur
van vars-gesnyde gras, die onwerklike sonlig
(soos ‘n oordeel). En op die gras
twee jong kinders:
een in kortbroek en met ‘n poniestert
(my neef), maar dis die ander een
wat my aandag trek: ‘n klein grootmens
in grootmensklere (‘n donker pak),
kort hare glad teruggekam en die gesig
serieus. Hy kyk op en ek herken
myself. Ek wink hom nader, en hy kom,
skoorvoetend, skaam en met oë
wat alreeds te veel verstaan.
Ek hurk voor hom en strek my arms uit,
vee my hand ligweg oor sy wang
asof ek hom die versekering kan gee
dat alles vorentoe gaaf gaan wees
en hy dalk nog ‘n kans sal kry
om weer ‘n kind vir my te wees.
Hierdie gedig van Johann de Lange uit Vleiswond wat inspeel op ‘n gedig in Waterwoestyn:
Droombeeld
Die fyn takkie van my slaap
knak
is dit jy
wat buite wag voor jy klop?
Die gedig “Droom” handel oor die vaderfiguur wat oorlede is en die kind verwond het met sy voortydige dood. Alleen in die droom kan die verlies en onrus reggestel word.
Freud se droom probeer sy vriend se aandadigheid aan Irma se mediese fout “regstel”, soos Žižek dan aanvoer.
Outobiografiese verhale en drome – soos Felman aantoon – behoort aan die skrywer en die dromer.
Waarskynlik kan net jy dit korrek interpreteer.
In die bekende gedig van De Lange gebaseer op ‘n brief van Sheila Cussons (opgeneem in Die algebra van nood) lees ons:
Sheila Cussons: Brief aan ’n skrywer
Ek is ’n baie “lyflike” wese: pure sintuig,
& minder as die puur engele, pure gees,
maar oneindig heerlik veelsydiger verwikkeld
vanweë ons “woord-het-vlees”-gewordheid.
Katoliek wórd, wanneer dit regtig met jou gebeur:
wanneer jy nie net intellektueel
maar geheel-&-al die hele ding ondergáán,
is niks anders nie as ’n herkénning
(’n meteense sién)
van die vir-jou-tot-dusver verborge,
onvermoede, bínne-heid van jouself:
“Anima naturaliter Christiana”.
Dis nie ’n “buite” nie; dis die ontdekking
& bevryding, stort & uitstroom,
van wat die hele tyd “binne” was.
Die siel is wesentlik Christelik. Maar:
het ek dit nie aan lewende lywe ervaar nie,
na my jare van flirteer met alles onder die son!
Augustinus se skroeiende woorde,
daar in die vierde eeu, is die nuutste woorde:
“U het ons harte vir U gemaak, & nooit
sal hulle rus nie tot hulle rus in U”:
Woorde wat ’n wakkerword voorafgaan …
Christus was nie net sommer ’n man nie:
Hy is oneindig iets méér, oneindig iets ánders.
Hy is die Syn waardeur ons stroom
& deur hom stroom ook, by the same token,
al die demone, alle legendes & mites,
hemel & aarde, als van watter menslike
bewussyn daar ooit nog was, is, of sal wees.
Katoliek wees is iets wat as jy wil,
jou sal pel tot die been, sal lei
langs die hardste weë denkbaar (dánkbaar),
óp tot waar die lug te dun vir jou bloot
“natuurlikheid” is, & jou “jy”
verskrompel in vlam, tot jý jóú eindelik
vir die eerste keer werklik sien, hét, próé, ís.
Ek, lawwe lou-warm net-meer-as-mens
haas-onbeskryflike gekompliseerde
chiaroscuro-wese weet dít:
nie uit eie ervaring nie,
maar deur middel van ’n instink,
ouer – én eindeliker – as die wêreld.
*
Woorde wat ’n wakkerword voorafgaan …
Inderdaad terug by Freud. Die droom as wensvervulling, regstellende aksie, korreksie. Maar die droom ook as iets wat die gedig vooruitgaan.
Vertigo
Joan Hambidge
Drome is ook metafore
soos Scottie
deur ‘n opening
vol blomme in ‘n floristewinkel
Podesta Baldocchi kyk
op 224 Grant Avenue
na die geliefde
poserend as die verdwene een;
dan verander die staf in ‘n slang
toe ek nademaal
jou afskryf
in hierdie droom.
My hand nie melaats
toe ek ontdek
my vriende
hou ruggespraak
oor ons.
Nou val iemand na benede
uit ‘n klooster
soos ek toekyk
hoe al die vroue
één word: Carlotta Valdes,
Madeleine Elster, Judy
in ‘n lang galery
van verraderlike impersonasies.
Scottie oorkom
akrofobia
soos die digter
die hoogtevrese
van herkenning:
die digkuns
se uitkenningsparade
troef soos ‘n Hitchcock.
Scottie tweekeer
verloën verlaat;
die digter meerduidig
verraai geostraseer.
Hierdie gedig is ingegee deur ‘n film. Vertigo van Hitchcock waarin die filmmaker onder andere die impak van drome op die voormalige polisieman Scottie ondersoek (vertolk deur James Stewart) wat die vrou van Gavin moet ondersoek. Maar wie is Madeleine (vertolk deur Kim Novak)? En wat wil hierdie vrou hê?
Dit is ook die eerste film wat die sogenaamde dolly zoom-tegniek gebruik het om Scottie se gevoel van disoriëntasie weer te gee, die sogenaamde Vertigo-effek.
En wie was Irma in die werklikheid? Het sy bestaan of het Freud haar versin? Veral die voetnote in die Freudiaanse droomboek neem die leser na verskillende moontlikhede …
Die digkuns as dromende denke (Cloete) of dalk denkende droom?
Joan Hambidge
Oktober 2022
Bronne:
De Lange, Johann. 2009. Die algebra van nood. Kaapstad: Human & Rousseau.
– Vleiswond. Kaapstad: Human & Rousseau.
– Waterwoestyn. Kaapstad: Human & Rousseau.
Felman, Shoshana. 1993. What Does a Woman Want? Reading and Sexual Difference. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Balzac Adieu https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1554/1554-h/1554-h.htm
– The Girl with the Golden eyes
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1659/1659-h/1659-h.htm
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/416169 Besoek 7 Oktober 2022
Freud, Sigmund. 1953 / 1976. 4. Interpretation of Dreams. Londen: Pelican.
Gallop, Jane. 1982. The Daugher’s Seduction. Feminism and Psychoanalysis. Cornell: Cornell University Press.
Hitchcock, Alfred. 1958. Vertigo.
Leader, Dorian. 1996. Why do women write more letters than they post? Londen: Faber and Faber.