论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】This thesis points the limitations Sigmund Freud in “Creative Writers and Daydreaming” by a close reading approach of the text. Not only is his premise that links writing and playing questionable， his wish theory is also rather limited.
【Key words】close reading approach; Sigmund Freud; “Creative Writers and Daydreaming”
【作者簡介】续芳，天津广播影视职业学院。
In “Creative Writers and Daydreaming”， Sigmund Freud generally states the relationship of creative writer and daydreaming， through which he broadens our horizon of view on the relationship of literary works and the authors， arises our attention of an author’s sub-consciousness to his writing. However， this article also has some limitations that needs further discussion. This paper will mainly discuss the limitations based on a close reading of the text.
First of all， he absolutizes the boundary of reality and imaginativeness. At the very beginning， Freud links the creative writer and the child at play together by the similarity of fantasy and daydream. He states： “every child at play behaves like a creative writer， in that he creates a world of his own…the opposite of play is not what is serious but what is real”（211）. Then he points out that “the creative writer does the same as the child at play. He creates a world of fantasy which he takes very seriously… while separating it sharply from reality”（ibid.）. From his statements， the similarity of writer’s fantasy and child’s daydream lies in that both the two can be categorized into the imaginative world which is totally separated from reality. This similarity is Freud’s major premise based on which he develops his main idea of the importance of sub-consciousness. This may seem reasonable， after all，“imagining happiness” are shared by both the writer and the child in their process of writing and playing. Nevertheless， the author exaggerates the boundary and absolutizes it. Despite the fact that both writer’s writing and child’s playing belong to the imaginative category， yet neither of the two can be completely separated from reality. When child plays， for example， he uses some real material， such as sand， blocks， stick. Similarly， when writer writes， he needs such materials as pen， paper and computer. Louis Althusser also stresses material aspect：
Where only a single subject （such and such an individual） is concerned， the existence of the ideas of his belief is material in that his ideas are his material actions inserted into material practices governed by material rituals which are themselves defined by the material ideological; apperatus from which derive the ideas of that subject.（243） From this point of view， Freud’s complete separation of writing and reality is not comprehensive.
Besides， the connection of imaginative world and reality in child’s play and writer’s writing also exist in their material foundation and limitation. Both child and writer derive their inspirations from reality， and vice versa， reality and real experience do influence play and writing. Numerous literary works are derived from the author’s life experience. For example， Mark Twain successively experienced life as a painter’s apprentice， a tramp printer， a silver miner， a steamboat pilot on the Mississippi， and a frontier journalist in Nevada and Califorlia. Doubtlessly， he drew heavily from his rich life experience. Professor Chang’s general introduction of Mark Twain is that：
He confined himself to the life which he was familiar， convinced， as he states in a letter of 1890， that “the most usable capital， of culture of education usable in the building of novel is personal experience.” And certainly he was at his best when， in the words of Everett Carter， transmitting the ore of his personal experience into “the gold of reminiscence， autobiography and autobiographical fiction.” …His usable past was mostly related to the Mississippi and the west which incidentally became his major theme. （134）
Not only Mark Twain， William Faulkner’s works mirror out the degeneration of the Southern aristocratic family， and Henry James is famous for the “international theme”. To trace their success， we can also not neglect the fact that Faulkner himself is a descendant of a declined Southern aristocratic family， and James used to travel back and forth between Europe and America in his youth. The same reason can also explain why the images of the colored people in white writer’s works， and that of the female character in the male writer’s work are always criticized for their partialism and falsehood. Such reality issue as nationality， gender and time period also have great influence on writer’s writing. Therefore， Freud’s opinion of the writer separating the imaginative world “sharply from reality” is not convincing.
As the text continues， after Freud establishes the link by a common factor of imaginativeness， he tries to prove his idea that the same issue lies behind a writer’s creation and a child’s play： personal wishes. “A child’s play is determined by wishes” （213）， and “as people grow up…instead of playing， he now fantasies” （212）. Freud further states the relationship of fantasy and wish by saying that “ every single fantasy is the fulfillment of a wish， a correction of unsatisfying reality” （213）. Then he lists two groups of wishes： the ambitious wish and the erotic wish. This reasoning process is also problematic. On the one hand， it is through imaginativeness that Freud links play and writing together. Yet， composer’s composing and painter’s painting also contain the imaginative issue， they also enjoy the “imaginative happiness” while creating. If it is true that what fulfills a writer’s writing is wish， either an ambitious one or an erotic one， how can we find textual evidence to prove these two wishes in composer’s and painter’s works？ Obviously it is questionable to use an ambitious wish or an erotic wish to explain Lullaby or landscape painting. On the other hand， even when the discussing category is limited to literary works， we still find it questionable， because neither the ego-centric story nor its two features is suitable to explain every literary work in the world. We can easily find either the trace of a hero’s success process or his romantic love affairs with beauty in such novels as Great Expectations，Bel-ami，Oliver Twist，and Jane Eyre. Nevertheless， in the modernistic novels， the protagonist may not be a successful hero with lots of love affairs， for example， Slaughterhouse-Five and Catch-22. In the modern novel， even the distinction of good and bad is blurred， let alone the stressed greatness of a hero. In Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway， Mrs. Dalloway is a perfect hostess， Septimus is a lunatic veteran; the one is successfully holding an upper class party， yet the other is suffering from the loss of senses; the one is respected by others， the other is called schizophrenic， manic depressive and a survivor of trauma. However， it is Septimus who is the “suicidal double” of Clarissa. Obviously， in this novel， such boundary of good and bad is blurred， and the stress on the greatness of a hero finds no place. Freud’s idea of the two features thus is not appropriate to apply to this novel. Therefore Freud’s wish theory is rather limited.
In addition， when we take a broader view on the whole text， we may also find Freud’s limitations in two aspects.
The first one is that he only focuses on the author. What he says just indicates the search for the implicate sound of the author and the concealed wishes of the author. Yet “in considering a literary work， one must take into account not only the actual text， but also， and in equal measure， the actions involved in responding to that text” （270）， Wolfgang Iser points out clearly， “the literary work has two poles， which we might call the artistic and the esthetic： the artistic refers to the text created by the author， and the esthetic to the realization accomplished by the reader” （271）.Therefore， Freud’s statement neglects the role of the reader in the construction of the textual meaning. His over stress on the author has limited the multiple reading of the literary works， because “to give a text an author is to impose a limit on that text， to furnish it with a final signified， to close the writing”（Barthes 344）. Second， when discussing the influence of the writer on the literary work ， Freud over stresses the importance of one’s physical issue while neglect historical and cultural issue， over stresses the role of subconscious while neglects that of consciousness.
Therefore， by closely reading the text， we can find the inadequacy of Freud’s reasoning process， as well as the limitation of applying his point of view to the literary works. Nevertheless， the exploration of the subconscious and the indicate author’s sound does expand our horizons， and provide a special angle of interpreting the text.
References：
[1]Althusser，Louis. “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses.” Eds.Zhang Zongzai，Wang Fengzhen， et al. Selective Readings in 20th Century Western Critical Theory[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2002.
[2]Barthes，Roland.“The Death of the Author.” Eds.Zhang Zongzai，Wang Fengzhen，etc. Selective Readings in 20th Century Western Critical Theory[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2002.
[3]Chang，Yaoxin.The Survey of the American Literature.2nd ed[J]. Tianjin： Nankai UP，2003.
[4]Freud，Sigmund.“Creative Writers and Daydreaming.” Eds.Zhang Zongzai，Wang Fengzhen， et al. Selective Readings in 20th Century Western Critical Theory[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2002.
[5]Iser，Wolfgang.“The Reading Process： A Phenomenological Approach.” Eds.Zhang Zongzai，Wang Fengzhen， et al. Selective Readings in 20th Century Western Critical Theory[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2002.
【Key words】close reading approach; Sigmund Freud; “Creative Writers and Daydreaming”
【作者簡介】续芳，天津广播影视职业学院。
In “Creative Writers and Daydreaming”， Sigmund Freud generally states the relationship of creative writer and daydreaming， through which he broadens our horizon of view on the relationship of literary works and the authors， arises our attention of an author’s sub-consciousness to his writing. However， this article also has some limitations that needs further discussion. This paper will mainly discuss the limitations based on a close reading of the text.
First of all， he absolutizes the boundary of reality and imaginativeness. At the very beginning， Freud links the creative writer and the child at play together by the similarity of fantasy and daydream. He states： “every child at play behaves like a creative writer， in that he creates a world of his own…the opposite of play is not what is serious but what is real”（211）. Then he points out that “the creative writer does the same as the child at play. He creates a world of fantasy which he takes very seriously… while separating it sharply from reality”（ibid.）. From his statements， the similarity of writer’s fantasy and child’s daydream lies in that both the two can be categorized into the imaginative world which is totally separated from reality. This similarity is Freud’s major premise based on which he develops his main idea of the importance of sub-consciousness. This may seem reasonable， after all，“imagining happiness” are shared by both the writer and the child in their process of writing and playing. Nevertheless， the author exaggerates the boundary and absolutizes it. Despite the fact that both writer’s writing and child’s playing belong to the imaginative category， yet neither of the two can be completely separated from reality. When child plays， for example， he uses some real material， such as sand， blocks， stick. Similarly， when writer writes， he needs such materials as pen， paper and computer. Louis Althusser also stresses material aspect：
Where only a single subject （such and such an individual） is concerned， the existence of the ideas of his belief is material in that his ideas are his material actions inserted into material practices governed by material rituals which are themselves defined by the material ideological; apperatus from which derive the ideas of that subject.（243） From this point of view， Freud’s complete separation of writing and reality is not comprehensive.
Besides， the connection of imaginative world and reality in child’s play and writer’s writing also exist in their material foundation and limitation. Both child and writer derive their inspirations from reality， and vice versa， reality and real experience do influence play and writing. Numerous literary works are derived from the author’s life experience. For example， Mark Twain successively experienced life as a painter’s apprentice， a tramp printer， a silver miner， a steamboat pilot on the Mississippi， and a frontier journalist in Nevada and Califorlia. Doubtlessly， he drew heavily from his rich life experience. Professor Chang’s general introduction of Mark Twain is that：
He confined himself to the life which he was familiar， convinced， as he states in a letter of 1890， that “the most usable capital， of culture of education usable in the building of novel is personal experience.” And certainly he was at his best when， in the words of Everett Carter， transmitting the ore of his personal experience into “the gold of reminiscence， autobiography and autobiographical fiction.” …His usable past was mostly related to the Mississippi and the west which incidentally became his major theme. （134）
Not only Mark Twain， William Faulkner’s works mirror out the degeneration of the Southern aristocratic family， and Henry James is famous for the “international theme”. To trace their success， we can also not neglect the fact that Faulkner himself is a descendant of a declined Southern aristocratic family， and James used to travel back and forth between Europe and America in his youth. The same reason can also explain why the images of the colored people in white writer’s works， and that of the female character in the male writer’s work are always criticized for their partialism and falsehood. Such reality issue as nationality， gender and time period also have great influence on writer’s writing. Therefore， Freud’s opinion of the writer separating the imaginative world “sharply from reality” is not convincing.
As the text continues， after Freud establishes the link by a common factor of imaginativeness， he tries to prove his idea that the same issue lies behind a writer’s creation and a child’s play： personal wishes. “A child’s play is determined by wishes” （213）， and “as people grow up…instead of playing， he now fantasies” （212）. Freud further states the relationship of fantasy and wish by saying that “ every single fantasy is the fulfillment of a wish， a correction of unsatisfying reality” （213）. Then he lists two groups of wishes： the ambitious wish and the erotic wish. This reasoning process is also problematic. On the one hand， it is through imaginativeness that Freud links play and writing together. Yet， composer’s composing and painter’s painting also contain the imaginative issue， they also enjoy the “imaginative happiness” while creating. If it is true that what fulfills a writer’s writing is wish， either an ambitious one or an erotic one， how can we find textual evidence to prove these two wishes in composer’s and painter’s works？ Obviously it is questionable to use an ambitious wish or an erotic wish to explain Lullaby or landscape painting. On the other hand， even when the discussing category is limited to literary works， we still find it questionable， because neither the ego-centric story nor its two features is suitable to explain every literary work in the world. We can easily find either the trace of a hero’s success process or his romantic love affairs with beauty in such novels as Great Expectations，Bel-ami，Oliver Twist，and Jane Eyre. Nevertheless， in the modernistic novels， the protagonist may not be a successful hero with lots of love affairs， for example， Slaughterhouse-Five and Catch-22. In the modern novel， even the distinction of good and bad is blurred， let alone the stressed greatness of a hero. In Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway， Mrs. Dalloway is a perfect hostess， Septimus is a lunatic veteran; the one is successfully holding an upper class party， yet the other is suffering from the loss of senses; the one is respected by others， the other is called schizophrenic， manic depressive and a survivor of trauma. However， it is Septimus who is the “suicidal double” of Clarissa. Obviously， in this novel， such boundary of good and bad is blurred， and the stress on the greatness of a hero finds no place. Freud’s idea of the two features thus is not appropriate to apply to this novel. Therefore Freud’s wish theory is rather limited.
In addition， when we take a broader view on the whole text， we may also find Freud’s limitations in two aspects.
The first one is that he only focuses on the author. What he says just indicates the search for the implicate sound of the author and the concealed wishes of the author. Yet “in considering a literary work， one must take into account not only the actual text， but also， and in equal measure， the actions involved in responding to that text” （270）， Wolfgang Iser points out clearly， “the literary work has two poles， which we might call the artistic and the esthetic： the artistic refers to the text created by the author， and the esthetic to the realization accomplished by the reader” （271）.Therefore， Freud’s statement neglects the role of the reader in the construction of the textual meaning. His over stress on the author has limited the multiple reading of the literary works， because “to give a text an author is to impose a limit on that text， to furnish it with a final signified， to close the writing”（Barthes 344）. Second， when discussing the influence of the writer on the literary work ， Freud over stresses the importance of one’s physical issue while neglect historical and cultural issue， over stresses the role of subconscious while neglects that of consciousness.
Therefore， by closely reading the text， we can find the inadequacy of Freud’s reasoning process， as well as the limitation of applying his point of view to the literary works. Nevertheless， the exploration of the subconscious and the indicate author’s sound does expand our horizons， and provide a special angle of interpreting the text.
References：
[1]Althusser，Louis. “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses.” Eds.Zhang Zongzai，Wang Fengzhen， et al. Selective Readings in 20th Century Western Critical Theory[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2002.
[2]Barthes，Roland.“The Death of the Author.” Eds.Zhang Zongzai，Wang Fengzhen，etc. Selective Readings in 20th Century Western Critical Theory[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2002.
[3]Chang，Yaoxin.The Survey of the American Literature.2nd ed[J]. Tianjin： Nankai UP，2003.
[4]Freud，Sigmund.“Creative Writers and Daydreaming.” Eds.Zhang Zongzai，Wang Fengzhen， et al. Selective Readings in 20th Century Western Critical Theory[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2002.
[5]Iser，Wolfgang.“The Reading Process： A Phenomenological Approach.” Eds.Zhang Zongzai，Wang Fengzhen， et al. Selective Readings in 20th Century Western Critical Theory[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2002.