Freud Again?
Frankly, I thought pursuing a Doctor of Ministry degree meant I never had to read about social theories and theorists, or Freud’s weird fascination with sex and the male anatomy again. But amazingly, Freud continued to pop up like a bad dream throughout many of the theories in this book. Despite my previous studies, I found some fascinating concepts that have had a profound impact on our culture today.
When Marxism said “pleasure depends upon the accumulation of more and more things” (p.41) the American culture came to mind and the mentality of “keeping up with the Kardashians”. Elliot went on to describe how shopping is the most popular leisure pursuit next to watching TV worldwide. Because of the accessibility of around the clock shopping, there is no end to the consumerism, and the instant gratification. He supports that people become known more by what they have purchased than who they are (p. 41). Instantly, social media comes to mind as we see images of people promoting what they have instead of the character they possess. Through the Frankfort School the study of capitalism was studied, and I found it interesting they based much of their teachings through the lens of Freudian psychoanalysis, which has had a significant impact on society formation today (p.42). There he is again…
Like Freud, Foucault was also interested in sex and how it shaped society, and saw sex as the “focal point of our contemporary cultural fascination with personal identity and the self” (p.100). He supports his point with this…“modern culture in the west has become obsessed with sex as the truth of identity” (p. 101). As we deal with growing issues in our highly sexualized culture, it is not difficult to perceive this as being a relevant concept for our society. His point on becoming a “confessing society” only confirms the sexual obsession he perceives and he credits the Roman Catholic church as being able to regulate sexuality through confessions, thus regulating society (p.101). It made me think of the role of the church currently and throughout history to regulate morality, and I wondered where our country would be without the church’s influence.
The chapter on feminism peaked my interest, especially the theorist, Kristeva, and her writings on motherhood. Interestingly, her social theories evolved after becoming a mother, and it reminded me of the dramatic changes I went through after I became a mother. She described how “all experiences of pregnancy and maternity call into play powerful unconscious forces and primitive anxiety…” (p.230). Truer words have not been spoken, for I never knew what it was like to really fear the loss or injury of a child until I had children. Being a mother not only brought out some primal strength, protectiveness, and nurturance within me, but I saw and treated the world differently. My empathy increased with compassion for the parents who were forced to bury their children or watch them suffer a painful existence, and my tolerance for war dropped dramatically. There is no doubt motherhood has a profound impact on society formation. But alas, Freud, with his sexual obsessiveness, had to find his way into the teachings of feminism, by theorizing “the little girl is a little man” statement, and how she is guilty of all sorts of male envy and the power they hold (p. 213). Really?? I don’t know about you, but I’m ready for Freud to play a smaller part in our theories and social development.
About the Author
Jennifer Dean-Hill
10 responses to “Freud Again?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I’m ready too, Jen!
I loved your picture! I can always count on you to explain things in such a thought provoking but enjoyable way. I love reading your posts.
You know Jen, that I adopted all of my kids. I would like to add that even motherhood by adoption brings “out some primal strength, protectiveness, and nurturance within me, but I saw and treated the world differently.”
You are right – more compassion, too. Nothing like staying up all night with a sick child to find out.
There were so many things to think about in Elliott’s book. But one thing unites all cultures – families. Surely we have much to offer the world for happiness as Christian families. Freud is too depressing!!!!
Thanks Mary! Your mothering inspires me and I agree, it doesn’t matter if they are your natural born or not. I know how I feel about my kid clients….I fight hard for them when I’m needed like they are my own.
Thank you for adding the comment about adoption, Mary. This is why I struggle with some of the “biological” insistences of Freud and the like. It’s not always about who we give birth to when it comes to our instincts to mother.
“I don’t know about you, but I’m ready for Freud to play a smaller part in our theories and social development”…
I’m right with you sista!
I got lost in the psychobabble sections on Freud’s psychoanalysis, and found other aspects of the book much more interesting and engaging, though not necessarily the feminism and motherhood sections 🙂
Come on Geoff! You have a feminist heart, right? 😉
Jennifer,
Women were built with inner strength and man with outer strength. I will admit that some women have other strength. I was one in my youth but now I lean more toward my inner strength. We have longed for respect in society since the beginning of time.
Our God knows our value and worth. He created and anointed us! He has used us to fulfill many promises and purposes.
We carry a child, give birth to the child, and nurture the child with our body. We have discernment (premonition), wisdom, and the ability to multi-task.
We are phenomenal!
Lynda– we women are Christ-like! Jesus bled to give us (new) birth, and nurtures us with his body. We have no better model; our identify can be found fully in Christ.
Can we all agree that Freud has been overconsumed? 😉
Jennifer, I love your commentary about Kristeva’s motherhood experience, as well as your own, and how that personal change of relationship has had a ripple effect into other areas of life. As I read, it reminded me of God incarnating among us, understanding and fully relating to the joys and sufferings of human life (Jn 1.14; Heb 2.14-18, etc.).
Jennifer, I never thought I would say the words, “Amen” and “Freud” in the same sentence, but your post made it happen.
You asked the question, “I wondered where our country would be without the church’s influence.”
That’s a great question. I’m often saddened by the “bad rap”—I’m revealing my age—the church has received. There’s no question that the church as a political force and when it’s operating outside of the biblical mandate has caused more than it’s share of the world problems. But when the Church acts as “the Church” it has done and continues to do many, many great things. These include hospitals, universities, communities of faith, feeding the poor, healing the sick and taking care of the refugees and marginalized of this world. Not to mention the spiritual impact it has had in our world through the life-changing power of a relationship with Christ. Enjoyed your post Jennifer. Thank you!
Oh Jen, I am so with you on the Freud thing! There is so much wrong with his obsession.
Your comment about Marx really struck a chord with me. I certainly don’t agree with all of Marxism, of course, but I can see his indictment of consumerism reflected in our culture. We are determined to have more and content with sending our cast-offs to those who have less, if we think of them at all.
Thank you for your thought-provoking post!