Slide One: Psychological Criticism (Mind)

Welcome! I’m Dr. Liza Long. In this presentation for English 211, we will learn more about psychological criticism as an approach to literary texts. Psychological criticism is actually an umbrella term that encompasses a variety of theoretical frameworks from the field of psychology, but all of these have the mind (or the psyche) at the center of their target.

As a quick aside, I think it’s important to define what psychological criticism is not. When we do this type of criticism, we are not exploring how the text impacts your personal mental health or intersects with your own behavioral and emotional experiences. This is subjective reader response, a critical approach we learned earlier in the course.

What we mean by “mind” could be the author’s mind, or it could be the character’s mind, or it could be both. This means that with psychological criticism, we may explore author intent in a way that we really have not in other theories we have studied beyond biographical criticism. However, in many psychological approaches, especially Freud, the author’s stated intent would not matter because the text is a revelation of the author’s unconscious thoughts and repressed desires.

We don’t have to limit ourselves to the author’s mind though. We can use the same type of exploration to look at the characters. In this type of criticism, at its most basic level, we are just applying psychological theories to the literary text. Essentially, we are asking of the characters, “why did you do that?” As with New Historicism, cultural studies, and other approaches we have studied, psychological criticism tends to be interdisciplinary. Psychologists and sociologists may draw on literary texts to illuminate something about the mind.

The most common type of psychological approach is Freud’s psychoanalytic theory, and as I noted in the textbook, I am not really the biggest fan of Freud. When I do this type of criticism, my preference is often for Carl Jung, a student of Freud’s who introduced the idea of archetypes. But really, you can use any theory that you’ve learned about. I think the student example I’ve given you applies Elisabeth Kubler Ross’s five stages of grief to Raymond Carver’s short story, “A Small, Good Thing.” The idea with psychological criticism is that literature can be a useful tool to help us explore and understand the human psyche. With this type of criticism, we will focus on the author’s or the characters’ motivations, desires (both expressed and repressed), conflicts, and childhood experiences as ways to illuminate the text.

Slide Two: Freud’s Psychoanalytic Theory

For better or worse, Sigmund Freud was one of the most influential thinkers of the early twentieth century. He is the founder of the field of psychoanalysis, the first clinical method for diagnosing and treating mental illness. Freud’s experiences as a physician who focused on mental illness led him to develop his Oedipus Complex theory to explain how repressed desires and unfulfilled wishes can lead to neurosis. His 1899 book Traumdeutung (Interpretation of Dreams) was abridged as On Dreams in 1901 and introduced this theory. Freud’s theories have often been applied to Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, where the title character avenges his father’s death at the hands of his uncle and mother. Some key concepts include repression, the Oedipus complex, and the id, ego, and superego (which are the three parts of the psyche).

To understand the Oedipus complex, you need a basic knowledge of the famous play Oedipus Rex by the Greek poet Sophocles. In this play, Oedipus, a powerful and wise king of Corinth, discovers that he has married his mother and killed his father. Freud saw the play as an archetypal exhibit of repressed sexual desires.

These theories about repressed childhood sexual desires are at the heart of psychoanalysis. Freud asserts that instinctive sexual impulses play a large role in both mental illness and in the creative process. I personally just have a high level of discomfort with Freud’s theories—they are not something that resonates with me, but they have been popular approaches to literary texts.

In your readings this week, you have a passage from a lecture Sigmund Freud gave on the Oedipus Complex in 1920 (which is the most watered down version of his theory I could find) and two examples of scholarship applying Freud’s theories. The first is Dr. Ernest Jones’s 1910 analysis of Hamlet using the Oedipus Complex, and the second is James Marino’s 2017 examination of how the character of Ophelia undercuts the application of this theory to Hamlet.

Everyone always wants to understand Hamlet’s motives. Why does Hamlet act the way he does? And Ernest Jones is the first one who argues that Freud’s Oedipus complex is a great explanation for Hamlet’s behavior. As you can imagine, if you’ve read Hamlet, there’s so much written about Freud in Hamlet. If you Google Freud and Hamlet, you’ll find tens of thousands of results.

Marino’s basic argument is that no one ever looks at Ophelia, and that when we do, her characterization undercuts the Oedipus Complex approach to the play. I’ve linked to all three articles if you want to read them in their entirety. Reading the Ernest Jones article reminded me that modern scholars tend to get to their points much more quickly. You might take a look at his article just to see what literary criticism looks like in its early form. He has to engage with literally every person who’s ever written about Hamlet, which is why you’ll see so many ellipses. I think these three excerpts give you a good overview for what psychoanalytic criticism looks like.

As you can see from these examples, psychoanalytic theory predates New Criticism as a critical method (and is roughly contemporary with Marxist approaches). Most scholarship that references this theory now is more in line with Marino’s critical approach, as psychoanalytic theory has been dismissed as a scientific approach to the mind by many modern psychologists.

Slide Three: Beyond Freud: Applying Psychological Theories to Literary Texts

As you can see from this slide, we are not limited by Freud’s psychoanalytic theories when we do psychological criticism. You could also look at Freud’s student Carl Jung’s archetypes and his theory of the collective unconscious. Or you could consider B.F. Skinner’s behaviorism as an approach to character motivations in texts. Jacques Lacan is a psychologist by training but is often mentioned hand in hand with theorists like Derrida and Michel Foucault in his more deconstructive approach to the subject. Lacan develops a sophisticated construct of the real, the imaginary, and the symbolic to explain how minds function.

If you have taken an introductory psychology class, you are probably already familiar with Erik Erikson, Lawrence Kohlberg, and Abraham Maslow. I have seen interesting student essays using each of these theoretical approaches. With Erikson, you would look at the character’s psychosocial development over the lifespan. For Kohlberg, you could examine how people develop moral reasoning—one student applied this theory to Ishiguro’s novel Klara and the Sun to explore how Klara, the artificial friend, developed her own moral intelligence. Maslow could also be used to explore character motivation and development.

I mentioned already that the student example for this section applies Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’s five stages of grief as a framework for understanding loss. More current psychological approaches have used the pioneering work of Mamie Phipps Clark and Kenneth Bancroft Clark’s work on internalized racism or Derald Wing Sue and David Sue’s application of Indigenous spiritual frameworks to mental health. One of the examples for practice uses a newer example of a psychological theory that you can apply to a text.

Slide Four: Considerations in Psychological Criticism

I just love this picture of Freud because he looks so judgmental! Psychological criticism employs a wide variety of approaches to texts. The specific approach you take will start with the identification of a single theoretical approach such as those listed on the previous slide, though you are not limited to this list.

In psychological criticism, as with New Historicism, you’ll need to cite at least one outside source, which you will use to define the critical method you are using.

Again, remember that with this type of criticism, you are not doing subjective reader response. It’s not psychological criticism to talk about how the text makes you feel or affects your mental health. Here are a few things to consider when you do psychological criticism:

1. Psychological Theories: Familiarize yourself with the basics of key psychological theories, such as Freudian psychoanalysis, Jungian archetypes, or cognitive psychology. This knowledge provides a foundation for interpreting characters and their actions.
2. Author’s Background: Research the author’s life and background. Explore how their personal experiences, relationships, and psychological state might have influenced the creation of characters or the overall themes of the text. Also consider what unconscious desires or fears might be present in the text. How can the text serve as a window to the author’s mind? The fictional novel Hamnet by Maggie O’Farrell uses the text of Hamlet along with the few facts that are known about Shakespeare’s life to consider how the play could be read as an expression of the author’s grief at losing his 11-year-old son.
3. Character Analysis: Examine characters’ personalities, motivations, and conflicts. Consider how their experiences, desires, and fears influence their actions within the narrative. Look for signs of psychological trauma, defense mechanisms, or unconscious desires. You can see an example of this in the two literary articles above, where the authors consider Hamlet’s and Ophelia’s motivations and conflicts.
4. Symbolism and Imagery: Analyze symbols and imagery in the text. Understand how these elements may represent psychological concepts or emotions. For example, a recurring symbol might represent a character’s repressed desires or fears.
5. Themes and Motifs: Identify recurring themes and motifs. Explore how these elements reflect psychological concepts or theories. For instance, a theme of isolation might be analyzed in terms of its impact on characters’ mental states. An example of a motif in Hamlet would be the recurring ghost.
6. Archetypal Analysis: Jungian analysis is one of my personal favorite approaches to take to texts. You can apply archetypal psychology to identify universal symbols or patterns in characters. Carl Jung’s archetypes, such as the persona, shadow, or anima/animus, can provide insights into the deeper layers of character development.
7. Psychological Trajectories: Trace the psychological development of characters throughout the narrative. Identify key moments or events that shape their personalities and behaviors. Consider how these trajectories contribute to the overall psychological impact of the text.
8. Psychoanalytic Concepts: If relevant, apply psychoanalytic concepts such as id, ego, and superego. Explore how characters navigate internal conflicts or succumb to unconscious desires. Freudian analysis can uncover hidden motivations and tensions.

Slide Five: Example: Jung’s Archetypes

When I do psychological criticism, I love looking for evidence of Jung’s collective unconscious and considering how archetypes function in a literary text. In archetypal criticism, archetypes determine the form and function of literary works. As Jung wrote in Man and His Symbols, “My views about the ‘archaic remnants’, which I call ‘archetypes’ or ‘primordial images,’ have been constantly criticized by people who lack sufficient knowledge of the psychology of dreams and of mythology. The term ‘archetype’ is often misunderstood as meaning certain definite mythological images or motifs, but these are nothing more than conscious representations. Such variable representations cannot be inherited. The archetype is a tendency to form such representations of a motif—representations that can vary a great deal in detail without losing their basic pattern.” In other words, the archetypes arise unconsciously in literary texts. They are not deliberate choices according to Jung.

Jungian psychology has an influence on our lives in a variety of subtle ways, from the movies that we watch (Marvel and Star Wars are all about the archetypes) to the personality tests we take. The famous Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) used in many workplaces is based on Jungian archetypes.

In Jung’s theories, the persona, shadow, and anima/animus take the place of Freud’s id, ego, and superego to create the Self, our unified psyche. The persona is how we present ourselves to the world. The shadow represents our unconscious mind and its desires. The anima or animus is the opposite gender image in the psyche, or our “true self.” In other words, if I identify as a cisgender woman, my animus, the male image of myself, is my true self.

I have listed some of the more common archetypes here. I find them to be particularly useful when I teach mythology. According to Jung, we are not born with a mind that is a “blank slate,” instead, these archetypes are present in the collective unconscious of every human. In addition to the persona, the shadow, and the anima/animus, Jung also writes about the Father who represents the provider, protector, and wisdom and the Mother who represents love, compassion, and caring. Other archetypes include the child, the hero (think of Joseph Campbell’s hero’s journey monomyth), the sage, the maiden, and the trickster.

Slide Six: A Narrow Fellow in the Grass

To practice how we apply psychological criticism to a text, let’s look at an Emily Dickinson poem, “A Narrow Fellow in the Grass.” The text on this slide is the corrected version that Dickinson’s editors published under the title “The Snake.” It’s one of just 10 poems that were published in her lifetime. Listen as I read the poem out loud and make notes about things that stand out to you. Pay attention to imagery and consider the speaker’s and poet’s gender.

A narrow fellow in the grass
Occasionally rides:
You may have met him, —did you not,
His notice sudden is.

The grass divides as with a comb,
A spotted shaft is seen;
And then it closes at your feet
And opens further on.

He likes a boggy acre.
A floor too cool for corn.
Yet when a child, and barefoot,
I more than once, at morn,

Have passed, I thought, a whip-lash
Unbraiding in the Sun.—
When, stooping to secure it,
It wrinkled, and was gone.

Several of nature’s people
I know, and they know me;
I feel for them a transport
Of cordiality;

But never met this fellow,
Attended or alone,
Without a tighter breathing,
And zero at the bone.

—Emily Dickinson

What stands out to you in the text? The word “snake” is never mentioned explicitly in the poem itself, but if we assume the “narrow fellow in the grass” is a snake, we definitely have some good material for our analysis. I’ll just be blunt. The snake in this poem is a phallic symbol, representing a penis, and the speaker, who identifies as a boy in the original draft, is demonstrating Freud’s concept of penis envy. With this type of analysis, it’s important to identify any symbols that may have sexual connotations.

The author has a female name but identifies as a male in the original draft of the poem (her editor changed “boy” to “child”).  If we were doing Jungian analysis, we might think about the anima/animus here, but since we are trying a Freudian approach, I think it’s clear this is more evidence of penis envy.

I personally feel like this approach yields an exceptionally reductionist and narrow interpretation for this lovely little poem. But it’s pretty obvious how the imagery functions in Freudian analysis. With this approach, the poem is about penis envy and the poet’s repressed desires to be a boy. The anxiety the speaker exhibits in the lines “without a tighter breathing/And zero at the bone” represent this repressed desire.

Slide Seven: Terms To Use (Freud)

Here’s a list of terms that are used in Freudian criticism. For other types of psychological criticism, you’ll want to familiarize yourself with the theory you are using and apply the terminology from that theory. These are all psychoanalytic terms. Repression is when a character exhibits a selective memory. Think of Hamlet here when asked about the ghost of his father. Isolation is when a character produces an unexpected response. With sublimation, we ask whether an author or character is channeling repressed desires into something creative. Displacement is when we’re shifting our emotion from the actual target to something else. Denial is refusal to accept reality. Reversal is a turn of emotion or fate (think of Oedipus’s sudden reversal of fortune in the play, when he learns that he married his mom and killed his dad). Reaction formation is a pattern of actions that show denial of reality. Finally, we have the id, ego and superego, which I previously mentioned. Those are important concepts for this type of criticism.

Slide Eight: Limitations

Psychological criticism can be an interesting approach to a literary text, but it also has some limitations. Some main ones include the following:

• Subjectivity: Different readers interpret psychological elements in a text differently. Use an established psychological theory.
• Authorial Intent: Inferring an author’s psychological state or intentions based on their work can be speculative (but it’s okay to look at authorial intent with this type of criticism).
• Overemphasis on Individual Psychology: Psychological criticism may focus heavily on individual psychology and neglect broader social, cultural, or historical contexts that also influence literature.
• Stereotyping Characters: Applying psychological theories to characters may lead to oversimplified or stereotypical portrayals. Characters might be reduced to representing specific psychological concepts.
• Neglect of Formal Elements: Psychological criticism may sometimes neglect formal elements of a text, such as structure, style, and language, in favor of exploring psychological aspects.
• Inconsistency in Psychoanalytic Theories: Different psychoanalytic theories exist, and scholars may apply competing frameworks, leading to inconsistent interpretations (e.g., Freud vs. Jung)
• Exclusion of Reader Response: The reader’s own psychology and experiences contribute to the meaning derived from a text (subjective reader response)
• Neglect of Positive Aspects: Psychological criticism may sometimes focus too much on negative or pathological aspects of characters.

Despite these limitations, psychological criticism can still be an interesting approach to literary texts.

Slide Nine: Theoretical Responses

For our theoretical response this week, you will choose to work with one of the three texts in “Practicing Psychological Criticism.” Each text also comes with a predetermined psychological approach. You can practice Freud if you want to, but you can also look at Jung or apply a psychological theory that you may not be familiar with. Remember to cite a method source (our textbook or a general source like Psychology Today) if you are doing the Freudian or Jungian approach. For the third text, I have provided you with the method source.

Sometimes students will ask when they apply this approach, “Did the author really mean that?” For example, did Emily Dickinson really mean to tell us she wished she were a boy? If we are doing a Freudian or Jungian analysis, the answer to this question doesn’t really matter because the text is evidence of repressed desires or an unconscious mind.

Another question students ask is whether there’s any idea that’s off limits or too “out there.” Not really, but I do ask you to use your professional judgment when writing this week’s analysis. Freud’s theories deal explicitly with sexual desire, so we want to maintain a professional distance when applying these to a literary text. But as long as you can justify your interpretation with evidence from the text, any idea is fair game.

I recommend using the checklist in Practicing Psychological Criticism. Also use the questions below the text to help you write your mini essay of 500-750 words. Remember to include a thesis statement that makes an argument about the text using a psychological method. Finally, try to be creative and have fun this week!

As always, if you have any questions, please reach out! I really look forward to seeing your responses and application of these theories.