Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To zoom in or out on PEP-Web…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

Are you having difficulty reading an article due its font size?  In order to make the content on PEP-Web larger (zoom in), press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the plus sign (+).  Press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the minus sign (-) to make the content smaller (zoom out).   To go back to 100% size (normal size), press Ctrl (⌘Command  on the Mac) + 0 (the number 0).

Another way on Windows: Hold the Ctrl key and scroll the mouse wheel up or down to zoom in and out (respectively) of the webpage. Laptop users may use two fingers and separate them or bring them together while pressing the mouse track pad.

Safari users: You can also improve the readability of you browser when using Safari, with the Reader Mode: Go to PEP-Web. Right-click the URL box and select Settings for This Website, or go to Safari > Settings for This Website. A large pop-up will appear underneath the URL box. Look for the header that reads, “When visiting this website.” If you want Reader mode to always work on this site, check the box for “Use Reader when available.”

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Hinshelwood, B. (1990). Virginia Woolf and Psychoanalysis. Int. R. Psycho-Anal., 17:367-371.

(1990). International Review of Psycho-Analysis, 17:367-371

Virginia Woolf and Psychoanalysis

Bob Hinshelwood

Dear Sir,

I would like to respond to the excellent paper by Douglass Orr on Virginia Woolf's interest in psychoanalysis (The International Review, Volume 16, pages 151–161). His meticulous scouring of her writings to show the briefest mentions of Freud or psychoanalysis is helpful as a source of references. But I want to query his conclusions, especially on the question: why didn't Virginia Woolf have an analysis? He places some weight on the scathing remarks that Virginia Woolf makes in her diary about Freud and psychoanalysis prior to her visit to Freud in Hampstead in 1939. This, however, is less telling evidence than appears at first sight since she was scathing about everyone and everything in her diaries. It was part of her relentless internal destructiveness which no doubt could be related to her manic-depressive illness. It was not specific to her knowledge of psychoanalysis.

Orr makes three further blunt and related points: (a) psychoanalysis was hardly known; (b) analysts would not have considered a psychotic patient; and (c) there were hardly any analysts available anyway. These conclusions resemble the verdict of Quentin Bell (1972) who speculated that it is doubtful

whether she could have been analysed or whether analysis would have been an appropriate treatment. Analysts are usually reluctant to treat patients who have actually been mad and Virginia's first breakdown could hardly have been treated even by Freud himself: it was contemporaneous

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2018, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.