Introduction: Trauma, Psychoanalysis, Literary Form
Notes Introduction: Trauma, Psychoanalysis, Literary Form 1. For a historical genealogy of trauma, see Leys, 2000; Luckhurst, 2008: Part I. 2. Psychoanalysis has deeply informed our understanding of trauma, particu- larly in the Humanities (see, for instance, Felman and Laub, 1992; Caruth, 1995c; 1996; Leys, 2000; Garland, 2002d; Ball, 2007b), and several critics (including Stonebridge, 1998; Jacobus, 1999; Schwab, 2001; Jacobus, 2005; Moran, 2007; Radstone, 2007a; b) have turned specifically to British object relations theory when writing about the relationship between trauma or violence and literature. Nevertheless, important aspects of this strand of psychoanalysis have not yet been comprehensively explored regarding their usefulness for a literary aesthetics of trauma. 3. While PTSD is central to contemporary understandings of trauma (includ- ing mine), especially in the Humanities, Ruth Leys points to The Harmony of Illusions: Inventing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (1995) by anthropologist Allan Young, which postulates that, in Leys’s words, ‘far from being a timeless entity […] PTSD is a historical construct that has been “glued together by the practices, technologies, and narratives with which it is diagnosed, studied, treated, and represented and by the various interests, institutions, and moral arguments that mobilized these efforts and resources”’ (2000: 6). For her part, Leys identifies ‘the problem of imitation, defined as a problem of hypnotic imitation’ (2000: 8) as central to the history of trauma (see also Radstone, 2007b: 14–16). 4. Relating to transnational adoption, Drucilla Cornell adopts Gayatri Spivak’s phrase ‘enabling violation’ to indicate ‘what can be enabling for certain children – parents who adopt them and, in many cases, enable them to stay alive – is inseparable from the violation perpetuated through systematic inequalities’ (2007: 234).
[Show full text]