Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
PEP-Easy Tip: To save PEP-Easy to the home screen

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To start PEP-Easy without first opening your browser–just as you would start a mobile app, you can save a shortcut to your home screen.

First, in Chrome or Safari, depending on your platform, open PEP-Easy from pepeasy.pep-web.org. You want to be on the default start screen, so you have a clean workspace.

Then, depending on your mobile device…follow the instructions below:

On IOS:

  1. Tap on the share icon Action navigation bar and tab bar icon
  2. In the bottom list, tap on ‘Add to home screen’
  3. In the “Add to Home” confirmation “bubble”, tap “Add”

On Android:

  1. Tap on the Chrome menu (Vertical Ellipses)
  2. Select “Add to Home Screen” from the menu

 

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

Yassa, M. (2019). Judy Gammelgaard: Efter Freud – Erindringsforstyrrelser og andre normale mærkværdigheder, After Freud – Memory Disturbances and Other Normal Remarkabilities (reviewer’s translation of title). Scand. Psychoanal. Rev., 42(1-2):114-117.

(2019). Scandinavian Psychoanalytic Review, 42(1-2):114-117

Judy Gammelgaard: Efter Freud – Erindringsforstyrrelser og andre normale mærkværdigheder, After Freud – Memory Disturbances and Other Normal Remarkabilities (reviewer’s translation of title)

Review by:
Maria Yassa

The reader of Freud is struck by the heterogeneity of his oeuvre – it is as if there were not one Freud, but several. Since the Freudian corpus is filled with caesuras, shifts of model and theoretical about-faces, early Freud is very different from late Freud. Besides chronological development, and the consequent heterogeneity of theory over time, a tension exists at any given point in Freud’s thinking, as he perpetually sways between a paradigm of the natural sciences on the one hand and a hermeneutic paradigm on the other, between the effort for exhaustive knowledge, and the stance that there will always remain something mysterious in psychoanalysis as a science – since its subject is the unconscious, which can never be the object of direct knowledge. Reading Freud literally, without consideration for the implications of these theoretical ambiguities, gives a rather flat and concrete picture of psychoanalysis, and it is in all probability readings of this kind that have led to the plethora of attacks on psychoanalysis that we have lately become all too accustomed to. One can imagine that what characterizes such readings is that they omit the complication in Freud. A reading that embraces and reckons with the complications and contradictions inherent in the Freudian models, on the other hand, is a reading that puts Freud to work – work that opens for wider, deeper understanding. Such a reading would be in accordance with the very emergence of Freud’s psychoanalytic theorizing, since it is the result of repeated reinterpretations and workings-through of his conceptual apparatus.

[This is a summary excerpt from the full text of the journal article. The full text of the document is available to journal subscribers on the publisher's website here.]

Copyright © 2021, 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.