Literature, Psychoanalysis, and Reader Response

Author(s): Norman N. Holland, Marshall W. Alcorn, Jr. and Mark Bracher

Source: PMLA , Oct., 1985, Vol. 100, No. 5 (Oct., 1985), pp. 818-820
Published by: Modern Language Association

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/462104

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Modern Language Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to PMLA

This content downloaded from

58.249.112.90 on Wed, 31 May 2023 01:19:11 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
818 Forum

appreciate Owen's
Owen's attention
attention toto certain
certain minor inaccura- ing identification
minor inaccura- identification with
withaacharacter
characterororananauthor,
author,litera-
litera-
cies in the Norton
Norton edition
edition that
that II did
did study
study inin my arti- ture might
myarti- might bring
bring about
aboutnew
newvalues,
values,re-forming
re-formingitsits
cle. As he points
points out,
out, the
the editors
editors retained
retained capitals "only reader's
capitals"only reader's superego
superego (rules
(rulesof
ofconduct)
conduct)ororegoegoideal
ideal(ulti-
(ulti-
for the terms
terms 'God'
'God' and
and 'Nature,'
'Nature,' and
and for personifica- mate
for personifica- mate goals).
goals).
tions that are
are clearly
clearly presented
presented by by the
the poetry
poetry as per- The theory
asper- theory is
is exemplary.
exemplary.Parenthetically,
Parenthetically,however,
however, I I
sonifications"
sonifications" (511).
(511). II would
would want
want to
to quibble
quibble with
withthe
thefeel impelled
impelled toto point
pointout
outthat
thatliterary
literarycritics
criticswant
want read-
read-
Norton editors about the clear exclusion of 1805's "val- ing to
to have
have social,
social, political,
political,and
andmoral
moralefficacy.
efficacy.Such Such
ley" from this rubric, especially since the word is ap- usefulness
usefulness justifies
justifies their
theirwork.
work.HereHerewe weshould
shouldrecog-
recog-
posite to the phrase "thy vale, / Beloved Hawkshead"nize that that our
our wishes
wishes may
maycolor
colorourourtheoretical
theoreticalaccount.
account.
in the 1799 text. Even so, my overall point about the This fact
fact does
does not
not refute
refuteAlcorn
Alcornand andBracher's
Bracher'sclaim,
claim,
way book 5 "emphasizes the containment of [the boy's]but it it indicates
indicates that
that these
theseclaims,
claims,which
whichareareafter
afterallall
movements by a supervising force" (99 [1984]: 928) sur- claims
claims about
about the
the real
realworld,
world,deserve
deservetesting
testingbybymethods
methods
vives without the support of the two details Owen hasmoremore systematic
systematic than
thanthe
theimpressions
impressionsofofteachers
teachers oror
thethe
removed from consideration. credos of critics.
As Owen suggested in a letter to me last April, it is Alcorn and Bracher use reports from actual psy-
probably advisable to use de Selincourt's edition ratherchoanalyses to illustrate the re-formation of self that cli-
than Norton's for information about the 1805 text-at nicians witness. But for reading's re-formation of the
least until the Cornell edition (by Mark Reed) appears, self, they turn to "the" reader of particular poems by
Shelley and Yeats. I would have liked more evidence
with its photographic reproductions of the manu-
script-since the Norton normalizations can be mislead- from the associations of actual readers.
ing. Owen also advised me that his own edition of theMy momentary skepticism, however, does not extend
1850 text, with a generous list of accidentals, is being to Alcorn and Bracher's conclusions. I think that liter-
published this fall by Cornell. His contribution prom- ature does re-form ego, superego and ego ideal. My
ises to be a valuable resource for those of us interested skepticism only reflects my desire for a more detailed
in Wordsworth's revisionary practices. account of how reading accomplishes the introjections
and identifications Alcorn and Bracher posit. I do not
SUSAN J. WOLFSON doubt that "Both the ego ideal and the superego are
Rutgers University, New Brunswick thus subject to continual influence and modification
through the reading of literature" (350), but I wish that
a complicated psychological process were not subsumed
in "influence and modification." I would like to have
Literature, Psychoanalysis, and Reader Response evidence of the changes and to know the particulars of
the introjective process.
To the Editor: It is, no doubt, my persistent questioning of the
processes of perception and reading that led Alcorn and
In "Literature, Psychoanalysis, and the Re-Formation
Bracher to conclude that I tend "to understand all iden-
of the Self" (100 [1985]: 342-54) Marshall W. Alcorn,
tification as projective identification, in which the
Jr., and Mark Bracher have not just written a highly reader
in- projects his or her fantasies and defenses on a
telligent essay, unusually well informed with contem-
text but does not introject or internalize alien charac-
porary psychoanalytic thought, they have introducedteristics encountered in the text" (351). But they are not
into PMLA a kind of earthy psychoanalysis often miss-
quite accurate. It is true that in my pre-1976 writings
ing from literary discourse. I probably should not ask
(the authors, curiously, cite nothing later) I may have
overemphasized what literary critics at that time
for more, particularly since they treat my own writings
generously. Nevertheless, I would like to call attention
thought farfetched, the surprising extent to which
to methods beyond even their vanguard account of psy-readers edit texts to suit their own fantasies and
choanalytic criticism. defenses. Then and since, however, I have also tried to
Alcorn and Bracher propose that recent psychoana- understand reading in the light of general theories of
lytic theory can buttress the belief that literature perception: how we perceive anything, the alien as well
"edifies-in the root sense of that term." It builds us. as the congenial. Most recently in The I (New Haven:
Literature, they note, might alter not only our cogni- Yale UP, 1985), I have presented a model consisting of
tions but, more significantly, the internal structures of an identity that governs a hierarchy of feedback
the self, and it is this kind of alteration that psychoanal- processes acting into the real world. This identity should
ysis helps us understand. Literature can achieve such a be understood not only as the agency and consequence
"re-formation" by processes analogous to those of psy- of the perceptions and actions it governs but as a
choanalysis. Literature, for example, mobilizes infantile theme-and-variations representation (not a Ding an
wishes, but it can only deny their gratification, as the sich). Such a model is not "solipsistic" unless most
psychoanalyst does, or supply a substitute. By promot- modern theories of perception are, since they also as-

This content downloaded from

58.249.112.90 on Wed, 31 May 2023 01:19:11 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Forum 819

sume the perceiver has top-down, inside-to-outside We are in complete agreement with Holland's obser-
domination over bottom-up, outside-to-inside stimuli.vation that since critics want to believe that reading
An identity-governing-feedback model might dovetailmakes a difference, our hypothesis that reading re-forms
nicely into Alcorn and Bracher's thesis, indicating how the self needs to be tested in a rigorous and systematic
"influence and modification" take place. It could un- manner. We hope that such testing can be done in the
pack such crucial phrasings as "Literature pressures thenear future-by others, if not by us-both to guard
self" and "Literature promotes re-formation of the against the danger of the theory's being merely a wish-
self," enabling us to sort out what the literature and the fulfilling fantasy and to provide material for refining
self do in these transactions and to formulate the and elaborating on the theory. Of course, such a proj-
processes Alcorn and Bracher postulate. We can image ect would be difficult. In addition to the difficulty of
those processes in ways consistent with psychoanalysis; identifying and controlling the numerous variables in-
with recent work by perceptual and cognitive psychol- volved in reading and interpreting literature, there is the
ogists, brain physiologists, and artificial intelligencers;problem that psychoanalysis itself has been plagued
and with what specialists tell us about how children and with when trying to provide evidence of its own ef-
illiterates learn to read. ficacy: how can one identify and measure, in an objec-
A second thing I would wish into Alcorn and tive manner, significant changes in the self?
Bracher's essay is a generalization of my first question Furthermore, any testing of our theory would need to
about the process of reading. Alcorn and Bracher say recognize that the theory offers not so much an account
that literature changes the superego and the ego idealof what actually occurs in the reading and study of
and the balance between them. Fine. But in resting theirliterature as a view of what is possible as a result of
account on the structures (i.e., long-term functions) cen- reading. The value of the theory lies in its ability not
tral to the theory of ego psychology, they are doing to mirror the reality of the reading process but to
what I call second-phase psychoanalysis. Would it not change that reality-to explore new possibilities for
be better to replace these structures with the processes reading, studying, and teaching literature.
they admittedly are and thus avoid the problems of Holland is also right in observing that we need "a
pointing to "things" or "agencies" in the mind that no more detailed account of how reading accomplishes the
one can see? Alcorn and Bracher will recognize that I introjections and identifications" that we posit. The
am asking the same kind of question that Roy Schafer identity-governing-feedback model that Holland pro-
does in his critique of ego psychology's reifications, A poses looks quite promising in this regard. Our own at-
New Language (New Haven: Yale UP, 1976). tempts to elaborate on the process by which literature
Like many other psychoanalytic theorists of today,elicits structural changes in the self are focusing on La-
Schafer points us toward a third-phase psychoanalysis, can's account of the roles played by language and the
a psychology of the self, and Alcorn and Bracher sayimaginary in structuring the self. If language-the key
they too are taking that step. To make this move, how-term missing from the theory outlined in our PMLA
ever, we probably have to rethink such ego-psychological article-is a significant structural element of the self,
structures as the superego into more theoretically open then literature, insofar as it dislocates, manipulates, and
processes of internalization or accommodation and as-alters language, can produce fundamental changes in
similation or feedback. In other words, their essay the self. Moreover, by including linguistic phenome-
evokes a fascinating and extremely complicated ques-na-such as metaphor, metonymy, repetition, and
tion. What is the relation between the structures of disjunction-among its key terms, the Lacanian model
second-phase psychoanalysis and the account of self-provides clear avenues of interchange with more tradi-
processes in third-phase psychoanalysis? This query, oftional literary critical models, including New Criticism,
course, puts Alcorn and Bracher's original, bold, andstructuralism, and deconstruction, as well as thematic
vigorous essay where it deserves to be, in the middle of and moral criticism.
the challenging transitions taking place in today's clin- We also agree with Holland that our theory would
ical psychoanalysis. benefit if it employed concepts that refer to (observable)
processes rather than to things and agencies that no one
NORMAN N. HOLLAND can see. Such concepts would not only make our the-
University of Florida ory more accessible and more testable, they would also
give a more adequate reflection of the nonsubstantial-
ity of the self. We would emphasize, however, that it is
Reply: impossible to do away completely with concepts refer-
ring to unseen agencies: if, as Hume pointed out, we
We thank Norman Holland for his insightful com- cannot directly apprehend a cause as such, neither can
ments, which point out a number of important ways in we function for very long without the concept-
which our theory of reader response needs to be ques- particularly in the realm of theory. Theory, despite its
tioned and elaborated. etymological roots, inevitably invokes the unseen; inso-

This content downloaded from

58.249.112.90 on Wed, 31 May 2023 01:19:11 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
820 Forum

far
farasasitit
offers
offers explanatory
explanatory
(and not(and
merely
not descriptive)
merely descriptive)(PMLA
(PMLA98 98[1983]:
[1983]: 800-14)
800-14)I have
I have
spentspent
some some
time ex-
time ex-
power,
power,it it mustmust positposit
whatwhat
cannotcannot
be directly
be directly ploring
ploringhow
observed. observed. howotherother writers
writersanticipated
anticipated
or used
or the
used the
Holland's
Holland's theory
theory of identity
of identity
is evidence
is evidence
of this fact:
of this "Ruines
"Ruinescomplex"
de- fact: de- complex" of of
vocabulary,
vocabulary,sentiment,
sentiment,
and con-
and con-
spite
spiteHolland's
Holland's caveat
caveat
that that
"this identity
"this identity
should beshould
un- be un-cerns.
cerns.Thus
Thusoneoneofofmymy functions
functions
in a in
collaborative
a collaborative
ef- ef-
derstood
derstood . . .. .as. aastheme-and-variations
a theme-and-variations representation
representationfort
fort with
withCharles
Charles andand
KentKent
Hieatt
Hieatt
has been
has been
to modify
to modify
(not
(nota aDing
Ding an ansich),"
sich),"
identity,
identity,
like cause,
likeremains
cause, in-
remains in-
the
the claims
claimsmymy colleagues
colleaguesputput
forth;
forth;
like an
like
ungrateful
an ungrateful
ferred
ferredrather
rather than than
seen.seen.
And if Andidentity
if identity
does not does
quite not quite
third
thirdgrace,
grace,I reduce
I reducethethebenefits
benefits
theythey
advance.
advance.
In thisIn this
have
havethe thestatus
status of agency
of agency
in Holland's
in Holland's
theory, other
theory, other retrogressive
retrogressive role
roleI have
I havefound
found
somesome
phrases
phrases
that wethat we
terms
terms(for (for example,
example, feedback)
feedback)
do appear
do to
appear
have this
to have this
think
thinkShakespeare
Shakespeare took
tookfromfrom
Spenser
Spenser
in poets
in poets
workingworking
function.
function. ThisThis only only
goes goes
to showto that
showanythat
theory
anymust
theory mustbefore-or
before-orduring-the
during-the probable
probable
timetime
of theofSonnets'
the Sonnets'
ultimately
ultimately posit
posit
causes,
causes,
unseen
unseen
agencies-precisely
agencies-precisely
at atcomposition.
composition.Two Twosuchsuch
exceptions
exceptionshave have
been been
alreadyalready
the
thepoint,
point,as as
Lacan
Lacan
notes,
notes,
wherewhere
there isthere
a gap in
is un-
a gap in un-
noted,
noted,oneoneby byGary
Gary Schmidgall,
Schmidgall, who who
in a letter
in a letter
to to
derstanding. PMLA (99 [1984]: 244) pointed out that Barnabe
Because of this necessity, we find Lacan's model Barnes in 1593 also associated "outwear," "devouring,"
preferable to Schafer's. For while Schafer is quite suc- and "time," and the other by Kent Hieatt himself, who
cessful in avoiding the reifications of ego psychology, added in his answer to Schmidgall that Spenser had
he pays a price in explanatory power. Lacan, in contrast, used "time . . . outwear" in The Shepheardes Calen-
retains such concepts as ego ideal, superego, phallus, der (1579).
and castration, thus preserving the discoveries as well Nicholas Grimald's verse also shows a liking for
as the explanatory power of traditional psychoanalysis. "time" and a form of "wear" (see no. 36 in Tottel's Mis-
And by reinscribing these concepts as algorithms that cellany [1557], ed. H. E. Rollins). Salisbury's complaint
cannot be understood apart from all the other al- in The Mirror for Magistrates (1559) mistrusts fame,
gorithms in the psychic equation-many of which in- "Which time it selfe must nedes devour" (ed. L. B.
volve experienceable linguistic, cognitive, and affective Campbell, 143), anticipating Ruines of Rome 3 and 8
phenomena-Lacan avoids the reifications of ego psy- and Sonnets 19. True, the Ovidian "tempus edax"
chology. Lacanian theory thus offers what we feel is one would have encouraged this metaphor, but writers of-
of the most fertile answers to Holland's question, ten preferred "consume" or "eat," and "devour" is
"What is the relation between the structures of second- fairly unusual. Then, in the 1587 Mirror, one finds Bur-
phase psychoanalysis and the account of self-processes det's complaint referring to "Britaynes first antiquities"
in third-phase psychoanalysis?" (476), another somewhat unusual word that Kent Hieatt
The fact that this question, as Holland points out, considers a link between Spenser and Shakespeare.
is central to clinical psychoanalysis itself, points to an- I have found only a little of the Ruines of Rome com-
other crucial question not explicitly addressed by our plex in the 1560s or 1570s, but in the mid-1580s it reap-
article, which a psychoanalytic theory of reader re- pears, particularly in the work of Arthur Gorges and
sponse must eventually come to grips with: which Geoffrey Whitney, both of whom knew Du Bellay's po-
model of mind gives the most complete and accurate etry and had connections with Spenser or his friends.
account of the psyche's functioning? Anyone who at- Gorges, too, conceived of time as wearing. For exam-
tempts to gauge the power that literature can have in ple, "That to revive which wronge of tyme might
human affairs must have an (implicit or explicit) answer weare" (Poems of Sir A. G., ed. H. E. Sandison, 67)
to this question. Holland's work over the past two de- translates Du Bellay's "Pour se venger du temps in-
cades is evidence that he has seen this point more jurieux" in Olive 34. In his Choice of Emblemes (1586)
clearly and pursued it more vigorously and successfully Whitney writes that Elizabeth's fame "no time, nor en-
than anyone else in our profession, and we thank him vie can devower" (106). Time also "wears" in these
for once again directing our attention to it. poems, particularly in the emblem "Scripta Manent"
'Writings Endure,' describing Troy's marble monuments
MARSHALL W. ALCORN, JR. MARK BRACHER eaten and worn "with tracte of stealinge time" (131).
Tulane University Kent State University And as in Ruines 7 and Sonnets 15-16, time does bat-
tle: it will "winne the feelde" so that our "wonders" are
"out of memorie worne" (167). Whitney was keenly in-
terested in how "Rome doth ruine feele" and "Tempus
Shakespeare
Shakespeare andandSpenser
Spenser omnia terminat" 'Time ends all things'; before Daniel
and Shakespeare he was the poet closest in spirit (if not
To the Editor: in talent) to Spenser when writing of such matters.
During the 1590s the Ruines complex may be found
Since A. Kent Hieatt discovered the impact fleetingly
of in the poems published with Constable's Di-
Spenser's Ruines of Rome on Shakespeare's Sonnets
ana (1592) and in Lodge's verse introduction to Phillis

This content downloaded from

58.249.112.90 on Wed, 31 May 2023 01:19:11 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms