Mad Knowledge in the Age of Mad Studies: on 'Psy- Chosis', Writing And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BIROn - Birkbeck Institutional Research Online Enabling Open Access to Birkbeck’s Research Degree output Mad knowledge in the age of mad studies: on ‘psy- chosis’, writing and the possibility of interpretation https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/45725/ Version: Full Version Citation: Bristow, Alan (2020) Mad knowledge in the age of mad studies: on ‘psychosis’, writing and the possibility of interpretation. [Thesis] (Unpublished) c 2020 The Author(s) All material available through BIROn is protected by intellectual property law, including copy- right law. Any use made of the contents should comply with the relevant law. Deposit Guide Contact: email Mad Knowledge in the Age of Mad Studies: On ‘Psychosis’, Writing and the Possibility of Interpretation. Thesis submitted for the degree of PhD Psychosocial Studies, Birkbeck College, University of London. Alan, B. Bristow 1 The work presented in this thesis is my own. Signed: Alan B. Bristow 2 Abstract The figure of madness has long been positioned as the literary, poetic or philosophical ‘other’, functioning as a point of non-meaning that marks the boundaries of discourse, thought and culture. Despite this, the task of rendering meaning from madness, often via its written expression, has a long and rich history. From psychiatry through to psychoanalysis and forms of critical theory, ‘psychotic’ text has continually been utilised to further knowledge claims about what constitutes madness as well as to demarcate disciplinary interests. The contemporary field of ‘Mad Studies’ is the latest project to problematize the act of supplanting meaning onto individual experience and thereby co-opt these complex facets of the human condition into academic or professional frameworks. This thesis engages with this set of debates and asks whether the written expression of madness can ever be analysed without necessarily re-inscribing it within such systems of knowledge, thereby committing forms of ‘epistemic violence.’ Whilst very urgent concerns circulate regarding the proliferation of ‘mental illness’ in contemporary society as well as questions as to who is best placed to tackle this contested arena, this thesis holds that the task of rendering meaning from madness requires urgent revisiting in order to provide a epistemological basis from which very real political and ethical action can follow. The thesis is then divided into two parts. The first provides a survey of the ways in which examples of ‘mad writing’ have been repeatedly analysed to assist in the production of knowledge about ‘psychosis’ and, by implication, the social bond. The Memoirs of Daniel Paul Schreber is the main focus as the thesis moves from the psychoanalytic readings of Freud and Lacan, through to the positioning of Schreber as an arch modernist before engaging in the schizoanalytic project of Deleuze and Guattari. The second part of this thesis engages with a body of ‘mad writing’ produced by celebrated science fiction author, Philip, K. Dick. By demonstrating how PKD’s Exegesis can be read at the level of ‘psychosis’ whilst at the same time providing insight on PKD’s specific socio- cultural moment, this thesis constructs a method for analysing mad writing that challenges reductive or pathologising reasoning that ultimately serves to ‘other’ madness. It does so by offering a psychosocial reading, and an associated understanding of ‘psychosis’ as being key to moving beyond restrictive debates within Mad Studies type literature. 3 Acknowledgements Sincere thanks first and foremost to Professor Lisa Baraitser for her unwavering support from the very beginning. I am extremely grateful for her encouragement, enthusiasm and belief in this project, without which this PhD would not have been possible. Likewise, I would like to thank the staff and students at the Department of Psychosocial Studies, Birkbeck for such a rewarding environment to have been a part of. Thanks are also due to Professor Derek Hook and Professor Ian Parker for their invaluable help, comments and advice. Outside of university life, I am forever grateful to my family and friends for keeping me sane during this process. And lastly, deep felt thanks to Nadia and Francesco above all. Your love and support during these times has meant everything. 4 In memory of my grandparents, Eddy and Olwen Webster and my friend, Stefano Sica. Dedicated to my son, Francesco. 5 Contents Introduction 8 1.1) Literature Review: Situating Mad Studies & the Interpretation of Mad Text 25 1.2) Critical Psychiatry 26 1.3) A New Paradigm for Studying Madness 31 1.4) Who is the Knower and Whose Knowledge Counts? 35 1.5) Narrative and Dialogical Research 39 1.6) Establishing a Field of Mad Writing 43 1.7) The Foucault/Derrida Debate 52 1.8) The Cartesian Exclusion 56 1.9) Cogito and the History of Madness 58 1.10) Felman, Literature and the Possibility of Reading Madness 62 1.11) The Unconscious 65 1.12) Althusser and Symptomatic Reading 67 1.13) Lacan and Althusser: The cahiers pour l’analyse 71 1.14) Surface Reading 74 1.15) Methods and Madness 77 Part I) Schreber, Mad Writing & Associated Sites of Psychosocial Theory 80 2.1) Psychoanalytic Clinical Interpretation 81 2.2) Schreber’s Madness 83 2.3) Freud’s Interpretation 86 2.4) Mechanisms of Paranoia 88 2.5) Lacan, ‘Psychosis’ and Schreber 92 2.6) Name-of-the-Father 94 2.7) Foreclosure and Schreber’s Delusional metaphor 96 2.8) The Later Lacan and Joyce-the-Sinthome 101 3.1) Schreber, Modernism & the Aufschreibsystem 108 3.2) Schreber & the Panopticon 109 3.3) Santner’s ‘Crisis of Symbolic Investiture’ 112 3.4) Kittler, Discourse Networks and Madness 118 3.5) Aufschreibsystem 123 3.6) Schreber/Santner/Kittler 125 4.1) The Schizo-Culture of Deleuze and Guattari 129 4.2) Anti-Oedipus, Desiring-Machines and the Body-Without-Organs 129 4.3) The ‘Schizo’ 134 4.4) Schizoanalysis/Psychoanalysis/Anti-Psychiatry 137 4.5) Wolfson, the Procedure & Deleuze’s Literary Clinic 145 6 Part II) Psychosocial Readings of Philip, K. Dick’s Exegesis 151 5.1) The Madness of Philip K. Dick: PKD, ‘Psychosis’ & The Exegesis 152 5.2) PKD, Postmodernism and (Paranoid) ‘Schizophrenia’ 154 5.3) PKD’s Madness 158 5.4) The Exegesis and Current Scholarship 165 6.1) Interpreting the Exegesis through a Psychoanalytic Lens 175 6.2) ‘Psychosis’ at the Surface 176 6.3) Idiosyncratic Language 178 6.4) Metamorphosis and the Automated Body 184 6.5) PKD-the-Sinthome 189 6.6) Exegesis as ‘Psychotic’ Text? 198 7.1) Dyschronia: From ‘Psychosis’ to Postmodernism via Orthogonal Time 202 7.2) Orthogonal Time 203 7.3) Pathologies of Lived Time 206 7.4) Lacan & ‘Psychotic’ Time 212 7.5) Postmodern Time 217 7.6) Temporal Becoming and Psychopathology 223 8.1) PKD’s Body of Writing 229 8.2) Networked Text/Networked Bodies 231 8.3) Cybernetics, Information & Embodiment 237 8.4) Autopoiesis 239 8.5) (Dis)embodiment 241 8.6) ‘Becoming-Information’ 246 Conclusion 254 9.1) On the Construction of Mad Knowledge 254 9.2) Psychosocial Interpretation of Mad Writing 257 9.3) The ‘Foucault/Derrida’ Debate Revisited 260 9.4) The Exegesis of Daniel Paul Schreber 262 9.5) Madness and Method: On the Possibility of Interpretation 266 Bibliography 269 Appendix 284 7 Introduction A little under ten years ago, at the start of my mental health social work training, I made the obligatory visit to the local psychiatric inpatient facility. Supported by an experienced colleague, well versed in psychiatric assessment and treatment, my task was to interview a patient to plan his eventual discharge. During the visit, the patient recounted the events that had led to him being forcibly detained by mental health services. These were characterised by numerous paranoid and conspiratorial themes related to the security services, MI5 and the broader intelligence community. I was informed that the patient’s ‘delusional architecture’ was one that repeatedly referenced his ongoing monitoring and surveillance by such clandestine, shadowy government forces. Such a delusional pattern was quite routine in psychotic patients. Although I can recall being taken aback by my first fully-fledged encounter with ‘psychosis’, I left the ward secure in the knowledge that what I had experienced was nothing more than an deviation from psychological ‘normality’. One that would be managed and, ultimately, alleviated via the continued use of antipsychotic medication and a stable package of support once discharged back into the community. Some days later, I came to learn that the patient in question was, in fact, subject to a ‘Control Order’, as implemented by the new Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005. I quickly found that such orders were utilised by police services to manage those deemed to be at high risk of committing terrorist activity, while allowing for various restrictions on their liberty. In the wake of the 7/7 bombings and the wave of media-led hysteria engulfing the western world about the threat of violent extremism, the patient had found himself under the direct management of police services. This situation had transpired following a low-level incident whereby others preying on his clear vulnerability had led him into a compromising situation. Mental health issues and vulnerability aside, the then Home Secretary ruled that the ‘Control Order’ should stand. This decision was made despite what the patient’s psychiatrist and wider supporting team knew to be true; that this patient 8 was far from a criminal mastermind engaged in the planning and carrying out of terrorist atrocities. To the contrary, it was the individual’s proximity to a geographical site of police interest that had led to him coming to the attention of security services. This newly acquired knowledge on the patient’s very particular social and legal situation gave me pause for thought.