2010, Number 1
Edipo y sus psiquiatras Evidencias históricas en contra de la originalidad del tópico freudiano: Joseph Raymond Gasquet (1837-1902) y el Edipo Rey de Sófocles
Leija EM
Full text
Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 31-37
PDF size: 128.40 Kb.
ABSTRACT
IntroductionOver a hundred years have elapsed since Sigmund Freud’s The Interpretation of Dreams was first published. Publication of this work obviously marked a new stage in the history of psychiatry and psychology. Since then, the Oedipus complex has been one of the pillars supporting the psychoanalytical view of the mind and a model for understanding the normal development of individuals as well as psychopathology. Sigmund Freud and his desert island: The ignorance of the contributions of XIXth psychiatry
How did Freud manage to chart a new course in an area that had already been explored and described by the psychiatrists that preceded him? The answer may lie in Freud’s medical and intellectual isolation. A propos of this, there is an interesting analogy he draws between himself and a famous character: «For psycho-analysis is my creation; for ten years I was the only person who concerned himself whit it […] Meanwhile, like Robinson Crusoe, I settled down as comfortably as possible on my desert island.» It is important to note that in Daniel Defoe’s novel, Robinson Crusoe managed to live with at least some of the comforts available to the people of his time. Thanks to his ingenuity, he was able to obtain a series of artifacts. Likewise, Freud devised psychological theories and explanations that already existed in his time and even beforehand. The difference was that Freud thought he owned the patent. Joseph Raymond Gasquet (1837-1902) and a model to understand psychopathology: Oedipus Rex
Born on 24 August 1837, Joseph Raymond Gasquet was the oldest son of Raymond Gasquet, a surgeon who spent most of his working life in London. Gasquet was a brilliant student, studying medicine at University College Hospital in London and graduating with distinction in 1859. After the opening of St. George’s Retreat, Gasquet accepted the post of assistant physician and played an active role in the growth and development of this asylum. He was a great admirer of the work of Charcot, whom he regarded as «one of the greatest of modern physicians.» As a result, Gasquet, like Freud, had a special interest in the phenomena of hypnosis and hysteria. He contributed to the dissemination of the knowledge of British psychiatry, writing for various publications. He spent his free time studying philosophy, theology, and universal literature, while his extensive knowledge of classical works enabled him to become familiar with ancient and modern schools of thought. In April 1872, Gasquet published an article on The Madmen of the Greek Theatre in the Journal of Mental Science and a few months later, in 1873, published a continuation of this work subtitled The Ajax and Oedipus of Sophocles. Both articles, published in a wellknown specialist journal, were several years ahead of the psychoanalysts interested in looking to Greek theater for models for psychopathology. Gasquet published his observations on Oedipus 26 years before Freud, also contributing studies on Orestes, Hercules and Cassandra to the same journal. Gasquet vs. Freud: contrasts and similarities with psychoanalytic thought
Due to Gasquet’s significant contributions to the Dublin Review, two years after his death, a compilation of several of his works was published in a book called Studies Contributed to the «Dublin Review.» This work included an article called Hypnotism written in April 1891, in which Gasquet attributes the start of the scientific study of hypnotism to Charcot. The most interesting fact about the article on Hypnotism is that Gasquet dealt with the issue of the unconscious nearly a decade before Freud published his descriptions. His deductions about the unconscious were so accurate and profound that, through Gasquet, we seem to be listening to the father of psychoanalysis. Another aspect worth mentioning is the seriousness with which Gasquet felt hypnosis should be used. Here we find an enormous contrast with Freud who, four years after Gasquet wrote this, would confess to his abuse of this form of therapy in Studies on Hysteria. Like Freud, Gasquet was a psychiatrist profoundly interested in the subject of religion. Gasquet analyzed the issue of religion in works such as The Physiological Psychology of St. Thomas, The Present Position of Arguments for the Existence of God, Lightfoot’s St. Ignatius and the Roman Primacy, The Canon of the New Testament and The Cures at Lourdes. In this last work, Gasquet described his experience of examining several cases of miraculous cures of pilgrims that visited the city of Lourdes. It is also important to mention that Gasquet described slips of the tongue (lapsus linguae), attributing them to an unconscious origin, over a decade before Freud. In a footnote to his article Lightfoot’s St. Ignatius and the Roman Primacy, written in 1887, Gasquet highlighted William Cureton’s mistake in quoting a Greek text from a letter from St. Ignatius: «Cureton unconsciously paraphrases αγVπηζ by εν αγVπη.» Lastly, we should mention that Gasquet’s interpretation of the myth of Oedipus significantly contrasted with Freud’s a few years later. Gasquet did not highlight parricide and incest as Freud did but rather Oedipus’s self-mutilation in the presence of a high degree of mental anguish. From Gasquet’s perspective, this self-mutilating behavior, which some have called the «Van Gogh Syndrome», could well be an «Oedipus complex» applicable to seriously disturbed patients and all the mentally ill that resort to self-injuries to certain extent. However, Gasquet’s main interpretation of the myth of Oedipus focused on a positive aspect of the tragedy, a detail overlooked by Freud. In order to understand this, it is necessary to consider the work Oedipus in Colonnus, in which the hero becomes a visionary and accomplishes a mission. Gasquet ended his study by referring to this last work. He remarked that when Oedipus «resting on a stone by the wayside at Colonos, is greater to every morally discerning mind than he was on his throne at Thebes.» Oedipus accepts his destiny and eventually his death. One might think that even in his youth, Oedipus was prepared to accept, if not the predictions of the Oracle, then the inexorable march of time. Through the concept of the three ages of man, he solves the almost indecipherable puzzle of the Sphinx. Through Gasquet’s study, we see how the figure of Oedipus provides more elements worth analyzing, which can shed more light on the psychological mechanisms that lead both to pathological behaviors and their resolution. It goes without saying that Gasquet’s interpretation was forgotten and replaced a few years later by a Freudian interpretation. Conclusion
Contrary to what the followers of psychoanalysis might believe, Freud was not the first psychiatrist to study Oedipus Rex to create a bridge between the science of psychiatry and the humanities. Psychiatry itself —since the XIXth century and without psychoanalytical theories— was able to explore the terrain Freud thought he had discovered. Throughout this article, we have been able to see t hat theater characters are still capable of improving our understanding of human nature. Oedipus Rex can still show us more about what psychoanalysis could see with its own lens. Due to the discoveries and notable advances of modern psychiatry, however, today’s researchers are very uninterested in the interface between dramatic art and psychiatry. However, theater provides us with a range of relatively unexplored elements for shedding light on the complex scenery of the mind.
REFERENCES