Makari, Schorske, and Rieff on Freud: Three Perspectives

Introduction: Three Scholars, One Subject

George Makari argued that Freud was a product of his environment. The culture of Vienna at the time was ripe for something new — but Freudian psychology still needed some external help gaining momentum, and that came by way of Carl Jung and his experiments, which brought a great deal of attention to Freud. Karl Schorske, on the other hand, contends that Freud was less the passive recipient of environmental effects and more the active thinker, whose goal was to give "a meaningful interpretation of Western civilization, and to find his own place in it." Phillip Rieff, for his part, views Freud less as an interpreter of Western civilization and more as a re-maker of it — a man of revolutionary ideas that would reshape the West and redirect its course. Rieff saw Freud's concept of "sublimation" as essential to the psychoanalyst's tenets: "So long as a culture maintains its vitality, whatever must be renounced disappears and is given back bettered" (5). Freud's role in promoting the art of sublimation was to unmoor consciousness from its oppression and allow new expressions of the Self to emerge.

Thus, one author viewed Freud as a passive recipient of honors that, without the work of those around him, never would have been bestowed; another viewed Freud as an interpreter of the West — a sage who was in the right place at the right time to see just what ailed the West as it suffered through one World War and stumbled into another; a third saw Freud as an active participant in the transformation of the West, not one who simply stood aside to remark on its condition, but one who was engaged in shaping the West to be something other than what it had been in the past.

Approaches and Perspectives on Freud

Each of the three authors takes a unique approach to the phenomenon of Freud. Makari takes a macro-perspective, approaching the figure by weaving through the various aspects and characters of his world. Schorske takes a micro-approach, giving Freud to the world by starting inside the psychologist's own skin — showing the reader an intimate, up-close portrayal of the man. Rieff offers a far more theoretical and philosophical take on the phenomenon of Freud, situating him within historical trends, showing how the psychologist's work compares to that of other historical figures, and demonstrating how the ideas championed by Freud altered the course of history thereafter.

The three approaches help to establish the context that makes each author so unique in how he views Freud. While each takes Freud as his subject, they move toward him in different ways so that, upon encountering him, he appears differently to all three: for Makari, who approaches from afar, Freud is a product of his environment; for Schorske, who approaches from within, the reader sees the world through Freud's own eyes; for Rieff, who approaches from the perspective of historical time, Freud is a transformational figure who alters history.

Types of Evidence and What Each Author Prioritizes

The types of evidence that each author focuses on differ in some ways but are also similar. Each writer examines the works of Freud and gives the reader some sense of their meaning or impact. However, they also focus on different aspects of Freud's life that they deem important. For instance, Schorske opens with an anecdote about Freud's sessions with the American poet Hilda Doolittle. The intimate setting and their conversation serve as an appropriate starting point because this kind of evidence allows the writer to deliver Freud the man to the reader: it is intimate, friendly, and admiring. Makari, on the other hand, focuses on other events — those taking place outside Freud's office, involving other figures operating in the field of psychology who had an impact on Freud's work and who enabled Freudian ideas to find a foothold. Makari examines the work of Adler, Stekel, Jung, and others, commenting on their efforts and disclosing how they made a difference in the Freudian field.

Rieff looks at the evidence differently still, engaging with the works of Freud not to explain the causes of their reception, but to trace how their dissemination changed the field. While all three examine Freud's works, each largely ignores the perspectives that inform the others. Makari overlooks the personal and private; Schorske overlooks Freud's external environment; Rieff sets aside both in order to focus on the intellectual dimensions of the historical narrative.

Conclusion

The three authors take three different approaches to the works of Freud. None of the three offers a more successful take on Freud's works than the other, for each is significant and meaningful in its own way. Each represents an aspect of Freud — of his works, his world, or his personality — that is not wholly present in the other authors' approaches. Each also, in a sense, helps to inform the others. For this reason, all three are important and vital in shaping one's understanding of the work of Freud.

Works Cited

Makari, George. Revolution in Mind. NY: HarperCollins, 2008.

Rieff, Phillip. The Triumph of the Therapeutic. IL: University of Chicago Press, 1987.

Schorske, Karl. "Freud's Egyptian Dig." NYBooks. www.nybooks.com/articles/1993/05/27/freuds-egyptian-dig/