Introduction: “The Madness Of Interpretation: Literature And Psychoanalysis” by Shoshana Felman
“The Madness of Interpretation: Literature and Psychoanalysis” by Shoshana Felman was first published in 1982 as part of the collection Writing and Madness. This groundbreaking work has had a profound impact on the fields of literature and literary theory, exploring the complex relationship between psychoanalysis and the interpretation of literary texts. Felman argues that the process of literary interpretation itself can be seen as a form of madness, as it involves delving into the unconscious depths of both the text and the reader. Her analysis of literary works, particularly those dealing with themes of madness and trauma, has significantly influenced the ways in which scholars have approached the study of literature and its relationship to human psychology.
Summary of “The Madness Of Interpretation: Literature And Psychoanalysis” by Shoshana Felman
- Psychoanalysis as a Temptation in Literary Interpretation:
- Felman critiques the prevalent tendency in psychoanalytic interpretation to provide an “explanation” or “explication” of a literary text, often seen in Wilson’s reading of The Turn of the Screw. She notes that psychoanalysis attempts to “uncover and avoid the very traps of the unconscious” in literature, which are embedded within the text itself (p. 154).
- Universal Dupery and Self-Deception:
- Wilson’s interpretation of The Turn of the Screw exemplifies a cycle of deception where characters, authors, and readers are all “dupes” of their own unconscious, with Wilson himself falling into the same trap by believing he can outsmart the text. “One is led to conclude that, in The Turn of the Screw, not merely is the governess self-deceived, but that James is self-deceived about her” (p. 143).
- Suspicion as the Root of Interpretation:
- Both the governess and Wilson approach the text with suspicion, leading them to misinterpret it. This suspicion is what drives their readings, and ironically, it is also what traps them. Felman suggests that The Turn of the Screw is a “trap set for suspicion,” turning the act of interpretation into a self-fulfilling prophecy where suspicion breeds error (p. 154).
- Psychoanalysis as a School of Suspicion:
- Felman identifies psychoanalysis as a “school of suspicion” that thrives on the gap between signifier and signified, leading to interpretations that are themselves traps. This suspicion-driven reading process makes the reader “caught, not in spite of but by virtue of his intelligence and his sophistication” (p. 154).
- The Double Trap of Reading and Interpretation:
- The text of The Turn of the Screw deconstructs both of its possible readings, leaving the reader trapped in a labyrinth of mirrors. The act of demystifying the governess’s position only results in repeating her gesture, making it impossible to escape the interpretive trap. Felman argues that this is “the simplest and the most sophisticated trap in the world: the trap is but a text” (p. 155).
- Blind Spots and the Illusion of Mastery:
- Psychoanalysis, in its attempt to master literature, often becomes blind to its own limitations. Felman warns that psychoanalysis, like Wilson, can become blind to its “own blindness,” failing to recognize its own involvement in the text’s rhetorical structures and falling into the “masterly position” of the text’s blind spot (p. 157).
- The Self-Subversion of Psychoanalysis:
- Felman highlights the irony in psychoanalysis’ attempts to avoid being duped by literature, noting that it often ends up “repressing the unconscious” it seeks to explain. In trying to master the text, psychoanalysis blinds itself to the “unmastery, of the impotence, and of the unavoidable castration which inhere in language” (p. 156).
- The Inescapable Participation in Literature’s Traps:
- Felman concludes that psychoanalysis cannot avoid participating in the errors and traps of literature. The act of trying to escape these traps is itself proof of being caught in them. She echoes Lacan’s sentiment, “Les non-dupes errent” (non-dupes err), suggesting that the very attempt to avoid being a dupe leads to error (p. 157).
Literary Terms/Concepts in “The Madness Of Interpretation: Literature And Psychoanalysis” by Shoshana Felman
| Literary Concept/Device | Description | Significance in Felman’s Analysis |
| Intertextuality | The relationship between texts, where one text references or incorporates elements of another. | Felman explores how literary texts are embedded in a larger cultural and historical context, influencing their interpretation and meaning. |
| Unconscious | The part of the mind that is inaccessible to conscious thought but influences behavior and emotions. | Felman argues that the unconscious plays a crucial role in both the creation and interpretation of literary texts, often revealing hidden meanings and desires. |
| Trauma | A deeply distressing event or experience that can cause lasting psychological damage. | Felman analyzes how traumatic events are represented and processed within literary texts, exploring the relationship between trauma and language. |
| Madness | A state of mental illness or derangement. | Felman examines the ways in which madness is portrayed in literature, often as a metaphor for the complexities of human experience and the limitations of language. |
| Reading | The act of interpreting and understanding a text. | Felman challenges traditional notions of reading, arguing that the process of interpretation is inherently subjective and can be influenced by personal biases and experiences. |
| Interpretation | The process of explaining or assigning meaning to something. | Felman explores the limitations and dangers of interpretation, emphasizing the potential for misreading and misunderstanding texts. |
| Psychoanalysis | A therapeutic method that investigates the unconscious mind through techniques such as free association and dream analysis. | Felman applies psychoanalytic concepts to the analysis of literary texts, revealing hidden meanings and underlying psychological dynamics. |
| Sublimation | The process of redirecting unacceptable impulses into socially acceptable behaviors. | Felman examines how literary texts can function as a form of sublimation, allowing individuals to explore and express their desires and anxieties in a safe and controlled environment. |
| Repression | The unconscious process of excluding disturbing thoughts and feelings from conscious awareness. | Felman analyzes how repression can manifest in literary texts, leading to hidden meanings and symbolic representations. |
| Ambiguity | The presence of multiple possible meanings or interpretations in a text. | Felman argues that ambiguity is a fundamental characteristic of literary texts, allowing for a multiplicity of readings and interpretations. |
Contribution of “The Madness Of Interpretation: Literature And Psychoanalysis” by Shoshana Felman to Literary Theory/Theories
| Literary Theory | Contribution | Quotes from the Article |
| Psychoanalytic Criticism | Felman critiques the limitations and paradoxes of psychoanalytic criticism, showing how it can fall into the very traps it seeks to expose in literature. She argues that psychoanalytic readings often repress the unconscious they aim to reveal. | “To master…is, here as elsewhere, to refuse to read the letters; here as elsewhere, to ‘see it all’ is in effect to ‘shut one’s eyes…'” (p. 156). |
| Deconstruction | The article engages with deconstructive ideas by revealing how texts like The Turn of the Screw deconstruct their own readings, making it impossible to fully master or control the meaning. | “James’s trap is then the simplest and the most sophisticated in the world: the trap is but a text, that is, an invitation to the reader…” (p. 155). |
| Reader-Response Theory | Felman highlights how the reader is implicated in the process of interpretation, often becoming a “dupe” of the text. The text itself manipulates the reader’s response, leading them into interpretive traps. | “The reader…is caught, not in spite of but by virtue of his intelligence and his sophistication” (p. 154). |
| Rhetorical Criticism | The article explores how rhetoric functions within literary texts to trap and mislead both characters and readers. It suggests that the power of rhetoric can undermine attempts at rational, systematic interpretation. | “The very act of trying to escape the trap is the proof that one is caught in it” (p. 157). |
| Hermeneutics | Felman’s work contributes to hermeneutics by questioning the possibility of a definitive interpretation. She argues that literature, especially in complex texts like The Turn of the Screw, resists conclusive interpretation by design. | “To demystify the governess is only possible on one condition: the condition of repeating the governess’s very gesture” (p. 155). |
| Structuralism | Felman discusses the structural relationship between signifier and signified in psychoanalytic readings, emphasizing the inherent instability and fluidity of meaning within literary texts. | “Suspicion…feeds on the discrepancy and distance which separates the signifier from its signified” (p. 154). |
| Post-Structuralism | The article aligns with post-structuralist thought by illustrating the inherent contradictions and ambiguities within texts that defy stable interpretation, showcasing the limitations of traditional critical approaches. | “The unconscious is most effectively misleading when it is caught in the act” (p. 157). |
Examples of Critiques Through “The Madness Of Interpretation: Literature And Psychoanalysis” by Shoshana Felman
- Critique of The Turn of the Screw by Henry James:
- Felman’s analysis of Wilson’s reading of The Turn of the Screw illustrates how psychoanalytic criticism can fall into the very traps it seeks to avoid. She argues that Wilson’s attempt to uncover the “truth” behind the governess’s hallucinations only leads him to replicate her own self-deception. Felman critiques this approach by showing that Wilson, like the governess, becomes a “dupe” of the text, failing to recognize the rhetorical traps James sets for both characters and readers. This critique emphasizes the inherent impossibility of mastering the text, as any interpretation ultimately repeats the text’s internal contradictions.
- Critique of Hamlet by William Shakespeare:
- Applying Felman’s insights to Hamlet, one could critique traditional psychoanalytic readings that focus on Hamlet’s Oedipal complex or his supposed madness. Felman would suggest that such readings fall into the same trap of trying to “explain away” the text’s ambiguities, reducing its complexity to a singular psychological interpretation. Just as in The Turn of the Screw, Felman would argue that Hamlet resists such reduction, with its layers of rhetorical and narrative complexity rendering any psychoanalytic “mastery” over the text inherently flawed and self-subversive.
- Critique of Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë:
- Felman’s ideas can critique psychoanalytic readings of Wuthering Heights that focus on the subconscious drives of characters like Heathcliff and Catherine. Such interpretations might attempt to diagnose their behaviors as manifestations of repressed desires or unresolved childhood traumas. Felman would argue that this approach overlooks the ways in which the novel itself constructs a narrative that entraps both characters and readers in cycles of obsession and self-destruction. Any attempt to “explain” the characters psychoanalytically only replicates the novel’s own labyrinthine structure, where interpretation becomes an endless process of misreading and reinterpretation.
- Critique of The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde:
- Using Felman’s framework, one could critique psychoanalytic readings of The Picture of Dorian Gray that focus on Dorian’s narcissism or the repressed homoerotic desires depicted in the novel. Felman would suggest that such readings miss the point by trying to pin down a singular meaning or psychological “truth” behind the text. Instead, the novel should be seen as a rhetorical trap that plays with the reader’s own desires and anxieties, mirroring Dorian’s own entrapment in his portrait. Any psychoanalytic interpretation that attempts to master the text’s meaning would, according to Felman, be blind to the novel’s subversive critique of the very act of interpretation itself.
Criticism Against “The Madness Of Interpretation: Literature And Psychoanalysis” by Shoshana Felman
- Overemphasis on Psychoanalytic Criticism’s Limitations:
- Critics may argue that Felman places too much focus on the limitations and pitfalls of psychoanalytic criticism, potentially dismissing the valuable insights and contributions that psychoanalysis can offer to literary interpretation. This overemphasis might be seen as undermining the legitimacy of psychoanalytic methods rather than acknowledging their nuanced applications.
- Complexity and Accessibility of the Argument:
- Felman’s argument is highly theoretical and complex, which could be criticized for being inaccessible to a broader audience. The intricate layers of her critique, particularly the interplay between deconstruction and psychoanalysis, may alienate readers who are not deeply familiar with these theoretical frameworks.
- Potential Circular Reasoning:
- Some may argue that Felman’s critique risks falling into circular reasoning, where the assertion that all interpretation is trapped within the text’s rhetoric is itself a form of interpretive entrapment. This could lead to a paradox where any attempt to critique or analyze a text is inherently flawed, making it difficult to propose any meaningful interpretation at all.
- Neglect of Alternative Interpretive Approaches:
- Felman’s focus on the flaws of psychoanalytic criticism may be seen as neglecting other interpretive approaches that could provide different insights into the text. By concentrating primarily on psychoanalysis, Felman might be criticized for not engaging with or acknowledging the validity of other critical perspectives, such as historical, feminist, or Marxist approaches.
- Undermining the Role of the Reader:
- Felman’s argument that readers are inevitably trapped by the text’s rhetoric could be criticized for undermining the role of the reader in constructing meaning. This perspective might be seen as disempowering readers, suggesting that they are merely passive participants in the text’s manipulations rather than active agents capable of critical interpretation.
Suggested Readings: “The Madness Of Interpretation: Literature And Psychoanalysis” by Shoshana Felman
- Felman, Shoshana. Literature and Psychoanalysis: The Question of Reading: Otherwise. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1982.
- Felman, Shoshana. What Does a Woman Want?: Reading and Sexual Difference. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993.
- Felman, Shoshana, and Dori Laub. Testimony: Crises of Witnessing in Literature, Psychoanalysis, and History. Routledge, 1992.
- Rabaté, Jean-Michel. The Future of Theory. Blackwell Publishing, 2002.
- Brooks, Peter. Psychoanalysis and Storytelling. Blackwell Publishing, 1994.
- Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Translated by Alan Sheridan, W.W. Norton & Company, 1977.
Representative Quotations from “The Madness Of Interpretation: Literature And Psychoanalysis” by Shoshana Felman with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “The desire to be non-dupe, to interpret, i.e., at once uncover and avoid, the very traps of the unconscious.” | This quotation encapsulates the fundamental tension in psychoanalytic criticism, where the critic attempts to uncover hidden meanings in the text while simultaneously trying to avoid being misled by the text’s own rhetoric and unconscious elements. |
| “James’s text, however, is made of traps and dupery.” | Felman highlights how The Turn of the Screw is deliberately constructed to deceive both its characters and its readers, making it a challenging text for psychoanalytic interpretation, which often underestimates the complexity of such literary traps. |
| “Suspicion…feeds on the discrepancy and distance which separates the signifier from its signified.” | Here, Felman discusses the role of suspicion in psychoanalytic interpretation, where the critic becomes fixated on the gap between what is said (signifier) and what is meant (signified), often leading to over-interpretation or misreading of the text. |
| “The trap is but a text, that is, an invitation to the reader, a simple invitation to undertake its reading.” | This quotation underscores Felman’s argument that literary texts like The Turn of the Screw are designed to lure readers into interpretive traps, making the act of reading itself a form of entrapment within the text’s complex rhetorical structure. |
| “To demystify the governess is only possible on one condition: the condition of repeating the governess’s very gesture.” | Felman points out the paradox in interpreting the governess’s actions in The Turn of the Screw: to critique or demystify her is to fall into the same trap of misreading that she herself falls into, highlighting the cyclical nature of interpretation in complex texts. |
| “In their attempt to elaborate a speech of mastery…what Wilson and the governess both exclude is nothing other than the threatening power of rhetoric itself.” | Felman critiques the attempts of both Wilson and the governess to control or “master” the text’s meaning, arguing that their efforts overlook the inherent power of rhetoric, which can undermine any attempt at definitive interpretation or mastery. |
| “In seeking to ‘explain’ and master literature…the psychoanalytic reading, ironically enough, turns out to be a reading which represses the unconscious.” | Felman highlights the irony in psychoanalytic criticism: while it seeks to uncover the unconscious, it often ends up repressing or overlooking the unconscious elements within the text by trying to impose a rigid, explanatory framework. |
| “To occupy a blind spot is not only to be blind, but in particular, to be blind to one’s own blindness.” | This quotation emphasizes the self-deceptive nature of certain critical positions, where critics may be unaware of their own limitations or biases, particularly when they assume a position of mastery or authority over the text. |
| “The very act of trying to escape the trap is the proof that one is caught in it.” | Felman illustrates the inescapable nature of interpretive traps within complex texts like The Turn of the Screw, where the reader’s attempts to avoid misinterpretation only further entangle them within the text’s rhetorical structure. |
| “Les non-dupes errent [non-dupes err], says Lacan.” | Felman invokes Lacan to reinforce her argument that those who believe they can fully understand or master a text without being misled are ultimately mistaken. This quotation highlights the idea that complete mastery of a text is impossible, and attempting to achieve it often leads to error. |