X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Sat, 26 Sep 1992 13:10:44 -0500
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         20SSMITH@GALLUA.BITNET
Subject:      FREUD AND OEDIPUS

Wanted to jump into this discussion before it ended.  My 100% agreement
that Frued was a sexist jerk...a brilliant sexist jerk but a sexist jerk
nonetheless...which creates a considerable amount of conlfict for me with
regards to the degree that I respect the man for his contributions to the
field of psychology with his model...in my reading of his written essays
spanning his career I have been continuously amazed at the feeling of
watching his very own thoughts develop, unfold, alter and change throughout
his work...equally impressive is the extent to which he was influenced by
so many other areas and disciplines.

Having made that rambling intro I'll attempt to make some brief points.
I do not understand how anyone can comprehend the complexities, intracies
and metaphorical power of the Oedipus Complex without having read, studied
and examined the Oedipus Rex of Sophocles, Shakespeare's Hamlet and Dostoevsky's
   The Brothers Karamazov from a literary and sociological perspective.  These
three powerful literary masterpieces had a tremendous impact on Freud's
development and modifications of the theory; political considerations certainly
not going unheeded...Additionally, from what I have been able to gather in
my reading of Freud's development of the theory, it did not grow out of a
consumate attempt to deny the existance of incest but rather to formulate
a model which could conceptualize the manner in which the psychical
structure goes awry in its economic management of dynamic forces which could
give rise to the occasion of the ego "acting out" in such a manner...those
of you truly familiar with psychoanalytic theory will recognize the significance
of the phrase "acting out" within the context of this discussion without
further explanation...what he may well be faulted for was developing more and
more attention to the focus of this model, this explanation of sorts than
the subject matter which gave rise to it...which later became addressed in
the pop literature as the suppression of the subject matter...from a psycho-
analytic perpsective one could hypothesize that Freud indeed may have
become focused on this theory in order to cope with his own issues regarding
the subject matter itself and its relevance to his own family...however
even if that is the case it does not negate the fact that the theory
offers a model within which to discuss incest...which of course would involve
too much space and time here on the network...it would require oversimplificatio
   to such a point as to make both the issue of incest and the Oedipal instincts
involved too trivial and that I do not want to partake in...I think it is
important to look at the role of the parental figures inthe Oedipal theory
with regards to the how adequately they resolved the Oedipal situation
in their own childhood...this would logically seem to be critically important
where incest is involved...as the discussion stands now it seems there is
a focus on the child's role in the Oedipal situation where incest is involved
which is tantamount to "blaming the victim"...the Oedipal theory as presented
over the years by Freud is far more complicated and entangled than that...
just read the three works stated at the outset of this posting and you will
quickly agree.

Sybil Smith at Gallaudet University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU