Reading Response 1: Freud and Beyond

As a first close encounter with the works of Sigmund Freud, my summation of

the introduction found in “Freud and beyond” is that firstly, I have no frame of
reference other than my own when considering what has been read, which
ensures that a meaningful response to the readings is very likely to be strongly
subjective.
In addition to the subjective nature of the reponses that will follow, I will also
highlight that in almost all instances of the subjects discussed, my experience of
what Freud mentions has been vastly different, a difference on my part which
stems from what I consider to be my own intimate, and yet individually
subjective encounters with the material discussed. The subjectivity of my
responses are certainly limiting in their ability to shed light on a braoder human
experience, however I am certain that the level of detail I have accessed within
myself, may serve to remedy this. Lastly for the purpose of a summative
response, I would say that the language that is used in the text is extremely
powerful in its ability to generate an emotive response within an individual, the
strength of such a response means once again that on an individual basis, the
psychological reaction and analysis to what has been discussed may vary vastly
from one individual to another.

“Freud treated dreams like any other associations: they were likely to contain
hidden thoughts and links to earlier experiences. Freud himself was a-prolific
dreamer. He also had certain troublesome neurotic symptoms. Soon, his most
important patient became himself.”

The statement above is used as the source for the introduction to the discussion
on Dreams. I imagine that such a remark in any given situation would weaken
any and all statements that would follow in the mind of the reader, because of
the individual and admitted, neurotic tendencies of the primary researcher. My
own experience with Dreams has either been that they have acted as a source for
me to psychologically fulfil any unlived desires within myself, or on the other
hand as a means of contemplation over a subject which has occupied my
thoughts. In various instances such dreams have opened new doors within my
psyche, in the resolution of certain questions pertaining to my life experience. I
would not know whether I would call myself neurotic, but in attempting to
answer the questions in my life I would say I have done my best thus far to
remedy any and all psychological difficulties encountered. However in the
attempt to answer the most essential of my own individual questions, I have
found that dreams are not a reliable means in the search for resolution, given
that they are so prone to one’s own individual desires, which can mean that the
dream experience may often be fantastical in nature, bearing no meaningful
connotation to daily life.

In the matter of the opinions expressed regarding Childhood sexuality, I find that
such opinions are difficult to relate to and therefore understand and agree with,
because of the following. The relationship between, Dreams, Childhood sexuality
and the achievement of Adult catharsis, also intersect with strongly emotive
wording used in the text and mentioned earlier by myself, as highly influential in
one’s interpretation. In the examination of Gloria the following is said in relation
to her troubling memories of earlier experience, which were filled with incidents
that “invariably had to do with a precocious involvement with, sexuality.”
Furthermore it is stated “Sexuality in general and her father in particular seemed
both intensely exciting and profoundly dangerous.” In summation to the
examination of her sexuality relating to her Father it is said “her mind, like her
vagina in childhood, was small and vulnerable; she longed to take in the
interpretations, but was afraid they would destroy her.”

From the quotations above I wish to highlight the following in relation to the
content. One,” precocious involvement with sexuality”, two, “intensely exciting
and profoundly dangerous,”three, the intimation of a childhood
conceptualisation of “her mind” and thus a concurrent link to an equally “small
and vulnerable” vagina, all of which she, four, longed to interpret but was
diverted thus, owing to the fear of imminent peril described as the “profoundly
dangerous”. Given that the content discussed is intimately linked to the
exploration of one’s childhood, it is pivotal that an as accurate as possible
relation to the nature of childlike interpretations of life situations is made. I
myself was once a child and as an adult I continue to enjoy the company of
children, as such, my own individual and objective experience of childlike
interpretations is that children interpret life in a manner vastly different from
the nature of the interpretations highlighted above. I say nature, because of what
I perceive to be the highly adult-like inclination exhibited by the wording used to
describe a supposed childhood experience. Gloria’s involvement in sexuality may
indeed have been precocious, in the way of being exposed to sexuality earlier
than what was common socially, but Freud fails to express the nature of such
experience, so as to validate the interpretation of it being “intensely exciting and
profoundly dangerous,” given that my observations of children and myself as a
child is that, I question whether the prospect of a new experience would
simultaneously arouse the feelings of excitement and danger. Experience tells me
such a consideration is far more likely to be found within an adult. My second
doubt is the suggestion that any child below the age of 7, would have what an
adult would consider, as a meaningful conceptualisation of the mind, and as such
prior to becoming pubescent, expressing a sense of smallness and vulnerability
concurrently, in relation to the mind ergo themselves, as well as to the vagina.
This intimation once again has in my opinion a very strong adult skewing to it.
On the contrary, I feel most children have very little sense of smallness to
towards themselves inwardly.
Lastly is Gloria’s apparent fear that all conceptualisation relating to her
experiences to sex would destroy her. My argument would be that, unless her
encounters and witnessing of sexual experiences were of a violent nature, which
in the instances of a young girl would most likely be the witnessing of the sexual
act itself being perpetrated in manner which the male subject was displaying
what could be interpreted as violent owing the dominant role often assumed by
males in sexual interactions. Other than this I myself do not see how a child could
have such an apparent negative disposition to something which they have yet to
have any powerful physical inward inclination towards.
In conclusion, my interpretation of the readings of Freud is that they appear
deceptive, and indicative of a man determined on discovering and even painting
his own version of the truth as it pertains to his life and inward wishes, as a
result of the discussions on dreams, childhood sexuality and adult catharsis. My
reason for this interpretations being because of my own view that the opinions
expressed relating to childhood, sound very much like adult-like sexually
informed interpretations of a time in one’s life when the degree and quality of
sexual experience is vastly different from the quality of experience that has been
expressed through the wording found in Freud’s introductory discourse.