Introduction: “Psychoanalysis and Literature: Past and Present” by Norman N. Holland
“Psychoanalysis and Literature: Past and Present” by Norman N. Holland first appeared in 1993 in the journal Contemporary Psychoanalysis. This article highlights the importance of literature and literary theory in the field of psychoanalysis. Holland argues that literature can serve as a valuable tool for understanding the human psyche, and that literary theory can provide a framework for interpreting literary texts in a psychologically meaningful way. He emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration between psychoanalysis and literary studies, and explores the ways in which these two fields can inform and enrich each other.
Summary of “Psychoanalysis and Literature: Past and Present” by Norman N. Holland
· Three Phases of Psychoanalysis:
- First Phase (1897-1923): Freud’s foundational discoveries including the unconscious, free association, the Oedipus complex, and infantile sexuality. This phase is characterized by explaining phenomena through the relationship between the conscious and unconscious mind. Freud’s early works laid the groundwork for understanding how human psychology influences and interacts with literature, focusing on authorial intent and unconscious drives.
“Freud made his great original discoveries. I mean his discoveries of free association, unconscious processes, the oedipus complex, and infantile sexuality.”
- Second Phase (1923-Present): Development of the id-ego-superego model and ego psychology. The focus shifted to understanding the interplay between ego and external forces (id, superego, and reality). This phase incorporated deeper mechanisms like defense mechanisms and structural analysis of the mind.
“Freud rethought the model… he and his colleagues in Vienna developed the structural id—ego—superego model, the principle of multiple function, and what we think of as ego-psychology.”
- Third Phase (1950s-Present): Contemporary psychoanalytic approaches such as object relations theory, self-psychology (Kohut), and feminist critiques. This phase emphasizes the interaction between the self and others, shifting focus to identity, mutuality, and the dynamics of relationships.
“They replace the earlier explanations…with self and other. These are psychoanalyses of the self.”
· Three Phases of Literary Criticism:
- Historical Criticism (Early 19th Century): Focused on understanding literature through historical context, examining characters and events as though they were real. The language was seen as transparent, pointing to external realities.
“We are looking for a history of Falstaff as though he were a real person…language is transparent. It only points us to things in the world which are the real objects the literary critic discusses: actions, motives, traits.”
- New Criticism and Structuralism (1930s-1970s): Shifted to analyzing the text itself as a self-contained entity. Critics focused on the formal patterns and structures within the language rather than external meanings. This phase was dominant in university studies during the mid-20th century.
“Literary critics took the language of literature as an end in itself. No longer were we to read through language to events and people.”
- Postmodern Criticism (1970s-Present): Emphasizes the relationship between the text and the audience, where meaning is not fixed but constructed through interaction with the text. Postmodernism rejects the monumental or self-contained text, instead embracing playfulness and intertextuality.
“In POMO, everything has quotation marks around it… the postmodernist says, I’m just playing; I don’t really mean this—it’s up to you to make sense of it.”
· Psychoanalysis in Literary Criticism:
- Psychoanalysis can be applied to three “persons” in literature:
- The Author – Exploring the unconscious drives and fantasies of the writer.
- The Character – Analyzing the fictional person within the text.
- The Reader – Examining the psychological dynamics and emotional responses elicited in the reader.
“Psychoanalysis does not deal with texts but with persons… there are three persons possible, the actual writer, the reader, and the person… in the text.”
· Challenges of Applying Psychoanalysis to Literature:
- Psychoanalysis is fundamentally about people and their minds, while literature consists of words. Therefore, bridging the gap between psychoanalysis and literary criticism requires finding ways to connect human psychological processes with textual analysis.
“Psychoanalysis deals with people, specifically people’s minds, but literature is words. There is no way, no way!, one can apply psychoanalysis to literature directly.”
· Example of Psychoanalytic Phases Applied to Literature:
- First Phase: A psychoanalyst might interpret Emily Dickinson’s poem as a reflection of her unconscious sexual fantasies, associating the bee and clover with phallic and receptive symbols.
- Second Phase: Focuses on the poem’s form and structure, linking it to defense mechanisms like repression. The poem’s imagination of a prairie is seen as a sublimated sexual fantasy.
- Third Phase: Contemporary criticism explores the reader’s personal associations with the poem, emphasizing the subjective and emotional responses elicited by the text.
“For her, sexual knowledge is linked with loss and death and disappearance. Hence she cannot enjoy Dickinson’s creative use of revery, and she rejects the poem.”
· Reader-Response and Feminist Criticism: Both of these approaches emphasize the role of the reader or the critic in creating meaning. Feminist psychoanalytic critics focus on the gendered experiences of readers and writers, while reader-response theory explores how individual reactions shape the interpretation of the text.
“Feminist psychoanalytic critics have addressed the real reactions of real women… both feminist critics and reader-response critics bridge between the persons of psychoanalysis and the words of literature by focusing on the real persons who read and respond to literature.”
· Conclusion: The essay concludes by emphasizing the bridge between psychoanalysis and literature: the interaction between real people (authors, readers) and the text. Literature becomes a collaborative creation of meaning through shared human responses, allowing for multiple interpretations based on personal and cultural backgrounds.
“The bridge is actual people engaging in actual literary transactions… The bridge, in short, is you—and me.”
Literary Terms/Concepts in “Psychoanalysis and Literature: Past and Present” by Norman N. Holland
| Literary Term/Concept | Description |
| Psychoanalysis Phases | The three phases in psychoanalysis: conscious-unconscious (Freud), ego-nonego (ego-psychology), and self-other (object-relations and contemporary approaches). |
| Historical Criticism | Early 19th-century approach that treats literary characters and events as real, with language acting as a transparent medium to historical or authorial contexts. |
| New Criticism | A mid-20th-century critical approach that focuses on analyzing the text’s structure and form as an entity in itself, without considering external references. |
| Postmodern Criticism | Contemporary criticism focusing on the relationship between the text and its audience, often embracing ambiguity, intertextuality, and playful self-awareness. |
| Object-Relations Theory | A third phase of psychoanalysis focusing on the dynamic interactions between the self and others, used to explore identity and relationships in literature. |
| Reader-Response Theory | A theory emphasizing the reader’s role in interpreting a text, focusing on personal emotional reactions and subjective responses to the literature. |
| Feminist Psychoanalytic Criticism | A critical approach that explores how gender and socially constructed roles influence the writing and reading of texts, often critiquing male dominance. |
| Sublimation | A defense mechanism where unconscious desires (often sexual) are transformed into socially acceptable or creative activities, applied in literary interpretation. |
| Oedipus Complex | A Freudian concept where a child experiences desire for the opposite-sex parent and rivalry with the same-sex parent, frequently applied in character analysis. |
| Primal Scene Fantasy | A psychoanalytic idea involving a child’s imagined or real witnessing of sexual relations between parents, used to analyze unconscious dynamics in texts. |
Contribution of “Psychoanalysis and Literature: Past and Present” by Norman N. Holland to Literary Theory/Theories
- Introduction of a Three-Phase Model for Psychoanalysis in Literature
Holland divides the development of psychoanalytic theory into three distinct phases: conscious-unconscious, ego-nonego, and self-other. This model expands the scope of psychoanalytic criticism by recognizing evolving approaches within psychoanalysis and how these approaches can be applied to literary analysis.
“We have three phases of psychoanalysis: conscious—unconscious, ego—nonego, and self and other.”
- Integration of Psychoanalysis with Various Literary Theories
Holland demonstrates how psychoanalysis can be applied to different phases of literary criticism: historical, New Criticism, and postmodern. His approach shows that psychoanalysis can work in tandem with these literary frameworks to analyze texts, allowing for a deeper understanding of both the text and the reader’s engagement with it.
“Now we have three phases of psychoanalysis and three phases of literary criticism.”
- Emphasis on Reader-Response Theory and Psychoanalysis
Holland contributes to reader-response criticism by emphasizing the active role of the reader in literary interpretation. He argues that the reader’s unconscious processes shape their understanding of the text, making reading a highly personal and subjective experience.
“Instead of saying the poem acts out a sublimation, these third phase psychoanalytic critics would say, The reader acts out a sublimation by means of the poem.”
- Focus on the Relationship Between Text and Reader in Postmodern Criticism
Holland’s work aligns with postmodern theories that question the fixed relationship between the text and its reader. He argues that the literary text is no longer seen as an end in itself but as a medium through which readers project their psychological processes and interpretations.
“The postmodernist says, I’m just playing; I don’t really mean this—it’s up to you to make sense of it.”
- Advancing the Concept of Text as a Psychological Process
Holland’s idea that a text can function as a psychological entity, similar to the human mind, allows critics to analyze not just the content of a text but also its form as a manifestation of unconscious processes. This concept advances psychoanalytic literary theory beyond simple character analysis to a broader analysis of the text’s form and the reader’s psychological interaction with it.
“The poem embodies a mental process or, more properly, an ego process that we introject.”
- Application of Contemporary Psychoanalytic Theories in Literature
Holland incorporates newer psychoanalytic theories, such as object-relations and self-psychology, into the analysis of literature. This extends psychoanalytic literary criticism by allowing for more nuanced explorations of identity, relationships, and the self within texts.
“Contemporary psychoanalytic approaches such as object-relations theory, self-psychology (Kohut), and feminist critiques.”
- Feminist Psychoanalytic Criticism
Holland highlights how feminist psychoanalytic critics address gender dynamics in both the reading and writing of literature. His inclusion of feminist theory demonstrates the adaptability of psychoanalysis to explore how literature shapes and is shaped by gendered experiences.
“Feminist psychoanalytic critics have addressed the real reactions of real women to a literature and criticism that are often dominated by male assumptions.”
- Challenges the Limitations of Traditional Psychoanalytic Criticism
By emphasizing the importance of individual and subjective responses to texts, Holland critiques the reductionist tendencies of early psychoanalytic criticism, which often focused narrowly on authorial intent or character analysis.
“There is no way, no way!, one can apply psychoanalysis to literature directly. Psychoanalysis can only apply to a person.”
- Bridge Between Psychoanalysis and Literary Criticism
Holland’s most significant contribution is his formulation of a bridge between psychoanalysis (which focuses on people and their minds) and literary criticism (which focuses on texts and language). He argues that this bridge is the interaction between the writer, the reader, and the text itself.
“The bridge is actual people engaging in actual literary transactions… the people that write and the people that read, and their very acts of writing and reading.”
Examples of Critiques Through “Psychoanalysis and Literature: Past and Present” by Norman N. Holland
| Book Title | Phase of Psychoanalysis | Critique Focus |
| Oedipus Rex (Sophocles) | First Phase (Conscious-Unconscious) | Holland applies Freud’s Oedipus complex to critique the character of Oedipus and the audience’s unconscious identification with his guilt and incestuous desires. Freud’s theory illuminates the psychological impact on the audience. |
| Hamlet (Shakespeare) | First Phase (Conscious-Unconscious) | Freud’s Oedipal analysis is extended to Hamlet’s hesitation in avenging his father. Holland critiques Hamlet’s delay as stemming from repressed desires toward his mother, similar to Freud’s psychoanalysis of unconscious drives. |
| Ulysses (James Joyce) | Second Phase (Ego-Nonego) | Holland critiques the modernist structure and narrative techniques in Joyce’s Ulysses using ego-psychology, analyzing how the text reflects complex internal conflicts and defenses of the characters through stream-of-consciousness. |
| Emily Dickinson’s Poetry | Third Phase (Self and Other) | Holland uses object-relations theory to explore Dickinson’s poems as reflecting a complex interaction between imagination (revery) and reality, with a focus on the reader’s psychological response to the symbolic language of the text. |
Criticism Against “Psychoanalysis and Literature: Past and Present” by Norman N. Holland
- Over-reliance on Psychoanalytic Theory
Critics argue that Holland’s focus on psychoanalysis, particularly Freudian concepts, limits the scope of literary interpretation. Some feel that his theories overemphasize unconscious drives at the expense of other factors like cultural, historical, or political contexts. - Reduction of Literary Texts to Psychological Models
Holland’s application of psychoanalytic phases can be seen as reductive, as it often seeks to explain complex literary works purely through psychological frameworks. This may ignore other aspects of the text, such as aesthetic form, linguistic innovation, or broader thematic concerns. - Ambiguity in Reader-Response Criticism
While Holland advocates for a reader-response approach, some critics find his reliance on the reader’s psychological projections to be too subjective. This raises concerns about the validity of literary analysis when it becomes entirely dependent on individual reactions, potentially leading to a lack of consistent interpretive standards. - Neglect of Contemporary Critical Theories
Holland’s work is seen by some as being out of step with newer critical theories like deconstruction, post-colonialism, and queer theory. His emphasis on psychoanalysis may limit engagement with these diverse, contemporary approaches that challenge the traditional psychoanalytic focus on universal experiences. - Inadequate Bridging Between Psychoanalysis and Literature
Although Holland attempts to bridge psychoanalysis and literature through the interaction of writers, readers, and texts, critics argue that his model often lacks clarity in demonstrating how psychological theories directly enhance literary understanding without imposing artificial connections. - Limited Engagement with Textual Formalism
Some critics feel that Holland downplays the importance of formal elements like narrative structure, syntax, and style, which are crucial to understanding literature. His psychoanalytic focus can sometimes overshadow the technical and formal analysis of literary texts. - Oversimplification of Complex Psychoanalytic Theories
While Holland integrates psychoanalysis into literary criticism, some argue that he oversimplifies intricate psychoanalytic theories, particularly Lacanian and post-Freudian developments, reducing their depth in favor of more generalized interpretations.
Representative Quotations from “Psychoanalysis and Literature: Past and Present” by Norman N. Holland with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “Psychoanalysis does not deal with texts but with persons.” | Holland emphasizes that psychoanalysis is fundamentally about human psychology, and when applied to literature, it must focus on the psychological experiences of the author, character, or reader rather than the text itself. |
| “We have three phases of psychoanalysis: conscious—unconscious, ego—nonego, and self and other.” | This outlines Holland’s categorization of the development of psychoanalysis, marking the evolution from Freud’s theories to contemporary psychoanalytic schools. |
| “In POMO, everything has quotation marks around it. The postmodernist says, I’m just playing; I don’t really mean this—it’s up to you to make sense of it.” | Holland critiques postmodernism for its playful, ambiguous approach to art and literature, where meaning is decentralized and left for the audience to interpret, reflecting the postmodern skepticism of fixed meaning. |
| “Feminist psychoanalytic critics have addressed the real reactions of real women to a literature and criticism that are often dominated by male assumptions.” | This highlights how feminist critics use psychoanalytic frameworks to explore the gendered nature of literature, addressing issues of male dominance in both the creation and interpretation of texts. |
| “The postmodern art is jokey and tricky. It self-consciously builds on other art forms.” | Here, Holland describes postmodern art and literature as self-referential and ironic, with a focus on intertextuality and the relationship between the work and its audience, rather than the work standing as a self-contained entity. |
| “Reader-response critics address the real reactions of real people.” | Holland advocates for reader-response theory, where the focus shifts from the author and the text to how individual readers interact with and interpret a literary work based on their personal experiences and psychology. |
| “Psychoanalytic criticism was a considerable advance over first phase, but there is that peculiar assumption that the poem is a mind that the critic can see.” | Holland critiques second-phase psychoanalytic criticism for its tendency to treat the text itself as if it were a mind, leading to oversimplified interpretations that assume direct parallels between textual structure and psychological processes. |
| “The poem embodies a mental process or, more properly, an ego process that we introject.” | This quote reflects Holland’s view that literature can be understood as a reflection of psychological processes, particularly ego functions, which readers internalize and process through their own mental frameworks. |
| “There is no way, no way!, one can apply psychoanalysis to literature directly.” | Holland asserts that psychoanalysis must focus on people, not texts. Therefore, literary critics must find ways to apply psychological analysis to authors, characters, or readers rather than to words or narrative structures alone. |
| “The bridge is actual people engaging in actual literary transactions… the people that write and the people that read, and their very acts of writing and reading.” | This highlights Holland’s central thesis that the connection between psychoanalysis and literature lies in the interaction between readers and texts, where personal, psychological experiences shape literary interpretation and meaning. |
Suggested Readings: “Psychoanalysis and Literature: Past and Present” by Norman N. Holland
- Holland, Norman N. The Dynamics of Literary Response. Oxford University Press, 1968.
- Freud, Sigmund. The Interpretation of Dreams. Translated by A.A. Brill, Macmillan, 1913.
- Lacan, Jacques. Ecrits: A Selection. Translated by Bruce Fink, W. W. Norton & Company, 2006.
- Showalter, Elaine. The Female Malady: Women, Madness, and English Culture, 1830–1980. Pantheon Books, 1985.
- Flynn, Elizabeth A., and Patrocinio Schweickart, editors. Gender and Reading: Essays on Readers, Texts, and Contexts. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986. https://www.amazon.com/Gender-Reading-Essays-Readers-Contexts/dp/0801833064
- Kristeva, Julia. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Translated by Leon S. Roudiez, Columbia University Press, 1980.
https://www.amazon.com/Desire-Language-Semiotic-Approach-Literature/dp/0231048077 - Jameson, Fredric. Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Duke University Press, 1991.
https://www.amazon.com/Postmodernism-Cultural-Late-Capitalism-Theories/dp/0822310902 - Wright, Elizabeth. Psychoanalytic Criticism: A Reappraisal. Routledge, 1998.
https://www.routledge.com/Psychoanalytic-Criticism-A-Reappraisal/Wright/p/book/9780415156818 - Brooks, Peter. Psychoanalysis and Storytelling. Blackwell, 1994.
https://www.amazon.com/Psychoanalysis-Storytelling-Peter-Brooks/dp/0631186783