Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
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.

Reed, G.S. (1983). The Literary Use of the Psychoanalytic Process: By Meredith Anne Skura. New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 1981. 280 pp.. Psychoanal Q., 52:469-473.

(1983). Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 52:469-473

The Literary Use of the Psychoanalytic Process: By Meredith Anne Skura. New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 1981. 280 pp.

Review by:
Gail S. Reed

Psychoanalytic studies of literature generally suffer by virtue of their interdisciplinary nature. Justifiably unfamiliar with what might be called "clinical" in the practice of literary criticism, psychoanalysts have no familiarity with a body of critical conventions which wishes to protect the whole text, including its surface. As a consequence, the analyst is at best puzzled by the reproach of "reductive" which a critic might level at an analyst's identification of an unconscious fantasy not apparent on the text's manifest level. Conversely, literary critics, lacking actual clinical experience, tend to know and apply only the psychoanalysis that is available in theoretical writings. The result frequently appears reductive to analysts familiar with the subtleties of clinical practice. What occurs is that the two groups of people are only apparently speaking the same language. In fact, an apparently common vocabulary refers to concepts which have evolved from very different sets of experiences. The critic does not appreciate the possible function of identification of latent fantasy content, and the analyst does not comprehend the critic's very different concept of interpretation. Given this situation, it is not surprising to find that misunderstanding has taken the form of disagreement and mutual disregard.

Meredith Skura's The Literary Use of the Psychoanalytic Process should go a long way toward clarifying misunderstandings and fostering dialogue. Informed by a clinical knowledge of psychoanalysis and a practical knowledge of literary criticism, it offers both the critic and the analyst a perspective on the other's endeavors.

[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 © 2019, 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.