What do you think?
Rate this book
The Freud Reader
The first single-volume work to capture Freud's ideas as scientist, humanist, physician, and philosopher.
What to read from the vast output of Sigmund Freud has long been a puzzle. Freudian thought permeates virtually every aspect of twentieth-century life; to understand Freud is to explore not only his scientific papers—on the psycho-sexual theory of human development, his theory of the mind, and the basic techniques of psychoanalysis—but also his vivid writings on art, literature, religion, politics, and culture.
The fifty-one texts in this volume range from Freud's dreams, to essays on sexuality, and on to his late writings, including Civilization and Its Discontents. Peter Gay, a leading scholar of Freud and his work, has carefully chosen these selections to provide a full portrait of Freud's thought. His clear introductions to the selections help guide the reader's journey through each work.
Many of the selections are reproduced in full. All have been selected from the Standard Edition, the only English translation for which Freud gave approval both to the editorial plan and to specific renderings of key words and phrases.
What to read from the vast output of Sigmund Freud has long been a puzzle. Freudian thought permeates virtually every aspect of twentieth-century life; to understand Freud is to explore not only his scientific papers—on the psycho-sexual theory of human development, his theory of the mind, and the basic techniques of psychoanalysis—but also his vivid writings on art, literature, religion, politics, and culture.
The fifty-one texts in this volume range from Freud's dreams, to essays on sexuality, and on to his late writings, including Civilization and Its Discontents. Peter Gay, a leading scholar of Freud and his work, has carefully chosen these selections to provide a full portrait of Freud's thought. His clear introductions to the selections help guide the reader's journey through each work.
Many of the selections are reproduced in full. All have been selected from the Standard Edition, the only English translation for which Freud gave approval both to the editorial plan and to specific renderings of key words and phrases.
896 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1989
115 people are currently reading
1,822 people want to read
About the author
Sigmund Freud
4,194Ìýbooks8,150ÌýfollowersDr. Sigismund Freud (later changed to Sigmund) was a neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis, who created an entirely new approach to the understanding of the human personality. He is regarded as one of the most influential—and controversial—minds of the 20th century.
In 1873, Freud began to study medicine at the University of Vienna. After graduating, he worked at the Vienna General Hospital. He collaborated with Josef Breuer in treating hysteria by the recall of painful experiences under hypnosis. In 1885, Freud went to Paris as a student of the neurologist Jean Charcot. On his return to Vienna the following year, Freud set up in private practice, specialising in nervous and brain disorders. The same year he married Martha Bernays, with whom he had six children.
Freud developed the theory that humans have an unconscious in which sexual and aggressive impulses are in perpetual conflict for supremacy with the defences against them. In 1897, he began an intensive analysis of himself. In 1900, his major work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was published in which Freud analysed dreams in terms of unconscious desires and experiences.
In 1902, Freud was appointed Professor of Neuropathology at the University of Vienna, a post he held until 1938. Although the medical establishment disagreed with many of his theories, a group of pupils and followers began to gather around Freud. In 1910, the International Psychoanalytic Association was founded with Carl Jung, a close associate of Freud's, as the president. Jung later broke with Freud and developed his own theories.
After World War One, Freud spent less time in clinical observation and concentrated on the application of his theories to history, art, literature and anthropology. In 1923, he published 'The Ego and the Id', which suggested a new structural model of the mind, divided into the 'id, the 'ego' and the 'superego'.
In 1933, the Nazis publicly burnt a number of Freud's books. In 1938, shortly after the Nazis annexed Austria, Freud left Vienna for London with his wife and daughter Anna.
Freud had been diagnosed with cancer of the jaw in 1923, and underwent more than 30 operations. He died of cancer on 23 September 1939.
In 1873, Freud began to study medicine at the University of Vienna. After graduating, he worked at the Vienna General Hospital. He collaborated with Josef Breuer in treating hysteria by the recall of painful experiences under hypnosis. In 1885, Freud went to Paris as a student of the neurologist Jean Charcot. On his return to Vienna the following year, Freud set up in private practice, specialising in nervous and brain disorders. The same year he married Martha Bernays, with whom he had six children.
Freud developed the theory that humans have an unconscious in which sexual and aggressive impulses are in perpetual conflict for supremacy with the defences against them. In 1897, he began an intensive analysis of himself. In 1900, his major work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was published in which Freud analysed dreams in terms of unconscious desires and experiences.
In 1902, Freud was appointed Professor of Neuropathology at the University of Vienna, a post he held until 1938. Although the medical establishment disagreed with many of his theories, a group of pupils and followers began to gather around Freud. In 1910, the International Psychoanalytic Association was founded with Carl Jung, a close associate of Freud's, as the president. Jung later broke with Freud and developed his own theories.
After World War One, Freud spent less time in clinical observation and concentrated on the application of his theories to history, art, literature and anthropology. In 1923, he published 'The Ego and the Id', which suggested a new structural model of the mind, divided into the 'id, the 'ego' and the 'superego'.
In 1933, the Nazis publicly burnt a number of Freud's books. In 1938, shortly after the Nazis annexed Austria, Freud left Vienna for London with his wife and daughter Anna.
Freud had been diagnosed with cancer of the jaw in 1923, and underwent more than 30 operations. He died of cancer on 23 September 1939.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 58 reviews
November 17, 2021
2002 read: So I read this back in 2002, and can just about remember how it delved into the life of Freud and his teachings. I do recall this book had some very detailed dream analysis and deciphering that all started off with so much promise but ended up being not that interesting for me. The highlight(!) for me was breaking down the difference between Freud and other schools of mind analysis, such as 's. Kind of tough giving a review 19 years later, but when read, my view was a weak 5 out of 12 - Two Stars.
January 30, 2011
"Our possibilities of happiness are already restricted by our constitution. Unhappiness is much less difficult to experience. We are threatened with suffering from three directions: from our own body, which is doomed to decay and dissolution and which cannot even do without pain and anxiety as warning signals; from the external world, which may rage against us with overwhelming and merciless forces of destruction; and finally from our relations to other men. The suffering which comes from this last source is perhaps more painful to us than any other." I'm not really sure how one goes about reviewing Freud, but perhaps I'll start with this rather Nietzchean quote from his Civilization and Its Discontents which stuck with me for whatever reason. No other passage in the book more succinctly describes what was plaguing the famous cigar smoker his whole life: the human condition. His concession that yes, indeed the human being is predisposed from infancy to live a life that is constantly torn between eros and thanatos, (Beyond the Pleasure Principle), is a bold stance to take in a profession that traditionally prides itself on its healing capabilities. But the pain that Freud is investigating is not the type that can be "cured" by just any doctor. His interest lies in life's darker afflictions, ones that can oftentimes be more detrimental than a physical ailment.
I noticed that many of the other readers who completed this book were also women - perhaps a testament to what Freud once said about "the less ethical sex", (hey, he was an attractive man willing to listen to crazy women talk all day.) But it's true that his most famous cases, including the study on "Dora", all revolved around intriguing, if hysterical, women. While I can see why feminists have long argued against the teachings of Freud, I believe they fail to realize his deep intellectual investment in the complexities of the female mind. By no means did Freud reserve his practice solely for female patients as the book also references several other interesting case studies on men such as Notes Upon a Case of Obsessional Neurosis ("Rat Man") and Process Notes for the Case History and From the History of an Infantile Neurosis ("Wolf Man").
Some other notable essays were The Interpretation of Dreams in which Freud's dream analysis is explained, Observations on Transference-Love, a fascinating look at the phenomena of the analyst-analysand relationship, Totem and Taboo, The Unconscious, Mourning and Melancholia, and The Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex. These are probably some of his more well-known essays, rightfully so, but my personal favorite was a cultural discourse written about the implied neurosis of Da Vinci, Leonardo da Vinci and a Memory of His Childhood. A similar essay I also enjoyed, The Moses of Michelangelo, took a look at one specific piece, the famous masterpiece of High Renaissance sculpture. In both essays, Freud painstakingly scrutinizes the work of two artists, (artists probably being those most visibly affected by neurosis :-) ), in the hopes that their sculptures and paintings will provide clues to the artist's deeper preoccupations. Freud's admiration for these men is clearly evident - after all, how would great works such as Da Vinci's "Mona Lisa" be produced if the mind's ability to sublimate wasn't intact?
All that aside, The Freud Reader is definitely a must-read for anyone interested in the influence of one of history's greatest workaholics. Many people throw the term "Freudian" around carelessly and the poor man is often misquoted or dismissed as a fanatical cokehead whose work holds no relevance today. While psychoanalysis may not be as popular of a practice as it was in the 50's or 60's, rest assured Freud's work will continue to stand as the best explanation of how we can all walk the earth as healthy neurotics.
I noticed that many of the other readers who completed this book were also women - perhaps a testament to what Freud once said about "the less ethical sex", (hey, he was an attractive man willing to listen to crazy women talk all day.) But it's true that his most famous cases, including the study on "Dora", all revolved around intriguing, if hysterical, women. While I can see why feminists have long argued against the teachings of Freud, I believe they fail to realize his deep intellectual investment in the complexities of the female mind. By no means did Freud reserve his practice solely for female patients as the book also references several other interesting case studies on men such as Notes Upon a Case of Obsessional Neurosis ("Rat Man") and Process Notes for the Case History and From the History of an Infantile Neurosis ("Wolf Man").
Some other notable essays were The Interpretation of Dreams in which Freud's dream analysis is explained, Observations on Transference-Love, a fascinating look at the phenomena of the analyst-analysand relationship, Totem and Taboo, The Unconscious, Mourning and Melancholia, and The Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex. These are probably some of his more well-known essays, rightfully so, but my personal favorite was a cultural discourse written about the implied neurosis of Da Vinci, Leonardo da Vinci and a Memory of His Childhood. A similar essay I also enjoyed, The Moses of Michelangelo, took a look at one specific piece, the famous masterpiece of High Renaissance sculpture. In both essays, Freud painstakingly scrutinizes the work of two artists, (artists probably being those most visibly affected by neurosis :-) ), in the hopes that their sculptures and paintings will provide clues to the artist's deeper preoccupations. Freud's admiration for these men is clearly evident - after all, how would great works such as Da Vinci's "Mona Lisa" be produced if the mind's ability to sublimate wasn't intact?
All that aside, The Freud Reader is definitely a must-read for anyone interested in the influence of one of history's greatest workaholics. Many people throw the term "Freudian" around carelessly and the poor man is often misquoted or dismissed as a fanatical cokehead whose work holds no relevance today. While psychoanalysis may not be as popular of a practice as it was in the 50's or 60's, rest assured Freud's work will continue to stand as the best explanation of how we can all walk the earth as healthy neurotics.
April 15, 2022
can’t spell Freud without F U
October 3, 2013
Wow what a journey! First and foremost I am more than thrilled I managed to finish this whole book! It is a tough dense book that takes a whole lot if commitment to plough through.
Now on to the book. How does one attempt to analyze the father of psychoanalysis? I don't know how one would attempt that, but I sure know there is a whole lot you can take from this book. Well at least, as to myself, I know reading Freud will forever change the way I think and analyze everything, especially people.
This book itself edited by Peter Gay, was not very reader friendly if I could say. Or maybe not for someone attempting to read Freud for the first time. I found the order of the essays/books rather odd, and I really didn't know the order by which I should read Freud.
Should it be chronological? Or topic based? I found myself researching Freud and his theories to be able to actually read and u understand the actual text! So if you are not familiar with Freud at all, I would recommend a book on more of an introductory level. The introductory excerpts by the editor were too brief I believe. I think the book will greatly benefit from longer introductions to each essay/book.
As to the actual content of Freud's theories, I love them. While I am under the impression that many find them outright ridiculous and irrelevant, I find myself admiring the way Freud constructs theories and his almost childish commitment to them throughout. The Id and the Ego, the pleasure principle, the conscious and unconscious and ofcourse the notorious Oedipus complex, these are all truly brilliant constructions that aid us even if the slightest bit into understanding the nature of our obscure and fragile psyche. I think Freud should at least be given credit for that.
I truly enjoyed big chunks of the book, and had far too many "hmmmm" moments. And I guess for me, a great book is one that makes you hmmm. And Freud indeed succeeded in that. I think after reading Freud you will automatically start to over analyze everything. Is that a good thing? I don't know yet, but it definitely feels like you unlocked a great hidden secret that only a few know about. Makes you feel superior, and I bet that is exactly how Freud felt!
Now that I read Freud, looking forward to Jung, Rank, Adler, Klein and Ernest Becker!
Now on to the book. How does one attempt to analyze the father of psychoanalysis? I don't know how one would attempt that, but I sure know there is a whole lot you can take from this book. Well at least, as to myself, I know reading Freud will forever change the way I think and analyze everything, especially people.
This book itself edited by Peter Gay, was not very reader friendly if I could say. Or maybe not for someone attempting to read Freud for the first time. I found the order of the essays/books rather odd, and I really didn't know the order by which I should read Freud.
Should it be chronological? Or topic based? I found myself researching Freud and his theories to be able to actually read and u understand the actual text! So if you are not familiar with Freud at all, I would recommend a book on more of an introductory level. The introductory excerpts by the editor were too brief I believe. I think the book will greatly benefit from longer introductions to each essay/book.
As to the actual content of Freud's theories, I love them. While I am under the impression that many find them outright ridiculous and irrelevant, I find myself admiring the way Freud constructs theories and his almost childish commitment to them throughout. The Id and the Ego, the pleasure principle, the conscious and unconscious and ofcourse the notorious Oedipus complex, these are all truly brilliant constructions that aid us even if the slightest bit into understanding the nature of our obscure and fragile psyche. I think Freud should at least be given credit for that.
I truly enjoyed big chunks of the book, and had far too many "hmmmm" moments. And I guess for me, a great book is one that makes you hmmm. And Freud indeed succeeded in that. I think after reading Freud you will automatically start to over analyze everything. Is that a good thing? I don't know yet, but it definitely feels like you unlocked a great hidden secret that only a few know about. Makes you feel superior, and I bet that is exactly how Freud felt!
Now that I read Freud, looking forward to Jung, Rank, Adler, Klein and Ernest Becker!
August 27, 2007
Forgive the egoism, but I love this book mostly for what I've scrawled in the margins. In the margin of p. 552 I wrote: "Why does our libido need objects when it has itself?" Along with the phone numbers of several unnamed boys and girls (Hey, it WAS Vassar!) on the front leaf, I scrawled "NEBULUS" and the words "swollen and humected."
Now, let's get back to Siggy's discussion of what happens when the cathexis of the ego with the libido exceeds a certain amount: we are unable to love.
Now, let's get back to Siggy's discussion of what happens when the cathexis of the ego with the libido exceeds a certain amount: we are unable to love.
October 3, 2007
That a cigar is sometimes just a cigar.
February 7, 2012
Freud's discoveries were even more miraculous than I had previously thought... My peers and professors had always told me that he was this "perverse," "outdated," masochist simply occupying his mind with the sexualization of everything he could get his rusty little beard on. They couldn't have been more wrong - Freud was a genius! Without him we'd be utterly lost.
I think it's interesting to point out that Freud's work - especially on the unconscious, the ego, the object-libido, etc. - has been sordidly misconstrued by a lot of "premier" academics. I get sneered at in the hallway when any of his work in my hand - how shrewd! Strange...
But anyways, if you read with your reason, paying decent attention to what goes on in material and mental life, you'll snatch up a good sum of applicable knowledge in this book. The translations are refined... Their are a lot of condensed work's in this volume... it's a good place to start in psychoanalysis.
I think it's interesting to point out that Freud's work - especially on the unconscious, the ego, the object-libido, etc. - has been sordidly misconstrued by a lot of "premier" academics. I get sneered at in the hallway when any of his work in my hand - how shrewd! Strange...
But anyways, if you read with your reason, paying decent attention to what goes on in material and mental life, you'll snatch up a good sum of applicable knowledge in this book. The translations are refined... Their are a lot of condensed work's in this volume... it's a good place to start in psychoanalysis.
May 26, 2022
Hoe meer ik erover nadenk, hoe vreemder de heersende publieke perceptie van Freud wordt. Het is een soort kariktatuur. Een vies mannetje dat in een leren feutieul sigaren rookt en zijn eigen mommy issues projecteert op de hele menselijke psyche. En daar houdt het dan op. Maar dat is lui wat niemand leest daadwerkelijk wat hij heeft geschreven. Nou, i took one for the team en ja, Sigmund is een beetje een manipulatieve cokesnuiver met wat rare ideeen over vrouwen, en het meeste wetenschappelijke werk dat hij heeft gedaan is inmiddels ontkracht, maar ik denk nog steeds dat hij ergens zijn vinger op legt. Ook al heeft hij het verkeerd, hij heeft wel 'iets' aangesneden.
Ten eerste zijn zijn essays gewoon kraakhelder geschreven. Het is een hele warme schrijver. Echt zo'n 19e eeuwse gentleman-intellectueel die ze niet meer maken tegenwoordig. Hij neemt de lezer serieus, en je moet soms hard werken om het te begrijpen, maar je voelt je gewoon heel welkom in zijn bladzijdes, als een woonkamer met een knisperend haardvuur en een kop chocomelk.
Dan de inhoud: ik denk dat we met zijn allen gewoon de Lacan-route moeten nemen met Freud. Lacan hevelde alle concepten van de psychoanalyse over naar de taalkunde, en op die manier werd het menselijk brein een linguistieke constructie die we als zodanig kunnen interpreteren. Als je Freud op deze manier behandelt los je veel van zijn inhoudelijke problemen op.
De bijbel is ook niet 'waar gebeurd', maar er zitten wel bepaalde waarheden in. Anders was het niet zo invloedrijk geworden.
Concluderend, het Oeidipus-complex betekent niet dat je letterlijk seks wil hebben met je moeder, het is eerder een verlangen om geaccepteerd te worden door een moeder-archetype. Opgelost!
Ten eerste zijn zijn essays gewoon kraakhelder geschreven. Het is een hele warme schrijver. Echt zo'n 19e eeuwse gentleman-intellectueel die ze niet meer maken tegenwoordig. Hij neemt de lezer serieus, en je moet soms hard werken om het te begrijpen, maar je voelt je gewoon heel welkom in zijn bladzijdes, als een woonkamer met een knisperend haardvuur en een kop chocomelk.
Dan de inhoud: ik denk dat we met zijn allen gewoon de Lacan-route moeten nemen met Freud. Lacan hevelde alle concepten van de psychoanalyse over naar de taalkunde, en op die manier werd het menselijk brein een linguistieke constructie die we als zodanig kunnen interpreteren. Als je Freud op deze manier behandelt los je veel van zijn inhoudelijke problemen op.
De bijbel is ook niet 'waar gebeurd', maar er zitten wel bepaalde waarheden in. Anders was het niet zo invloedrijk geworden.
Concluderend, het Oeidipus-complex betekent niet dat je letterlijk seks wil hebben met je moeder, het is eerder een verlangen om geaccepteerd te worden door een moeder-archetype. Opgelost!
August 24, 2015
If I could, I would give this six stars.
Like most people, I have heard more than a few negative comments about Freud over the years, and they left me with a solid but unjustifiable low opinion of his work. Prejudice, to my mind, is an ugly word, so this state of affairs could not be left alone. Solution, do some reading and come out knowing exactly why he's wrong. That was the theory, at any rate. It lasted... well, a page or two, at least.
Brilliant, logical, a gentleman all the way, absolutely a delight to read. Much of this can be tested for accuracy, if you have time enough to think through it. Fair warning though, by the end I was scribbling charts in order to keep the levels of abstraction straight. Which, for anyone who doesn't know me, pretty much *is* my idea of fun.
This officially turned me from a Freud skeptic to a convert. This man was a genius.
Like most people, I have heard more than a few negative comments about Freud over the years, and they left me with a solid but unjustifiable low opinion of his work. Prejudice, to my mind, is an ugly word, so this state of affairs could not be left alone. Solution, do some reading and come out knowing exactly why he's wrong. That was the theory, at any rate. It lasted... well, a page or two, at least.
Brilliant, logical, a gentleman all the way, absolutely a delight to read. Much of this can be tested for accuracy, if you have time enough to think through it. Fair warning though, by the end I was scribbling charts in order to keep the levels of abstraction straight. Which, for anyone who doesn't know me, pretty much *is* my idea of fun.
This officially turned me from a Freud skeptic to a convert. This man was a genius.
September 12, 2007
Absolute rubbish but very well-written rubbish.
July 22, 2007
Being that I am a psychology major I obviously need to examine all of the schools of thought out there. Freud being the "father" of psychoanalysis this book is interesting to read. It has many of his case studies and his papers, some that are less well known than his later essay Civilization and Its Discontent. I am looking forward to reading it, most likely in parts because it is so much to take in.
January 6, 2008
Freud was a clown.
March 12, 2011
An excellent compendium of Freud's writings. Unfortunately, it's a compendium of Freud's writings . . . .
February 8, 2023
Oh Sigmund, Sigmund, Sigmund.
This book was a long and, at times, thoroughly difficult/academic read. It is not only bogged down by academic, medical language, but the now thoroughly outdated medical and psychological language of Freud's time. That being said, if you stick with it, this reader will take you on a journey through Freud's tumultuous and varied intellectual evolution. I found the ordering and selections of texts to be quite informative and Peter Gay did a masterful job putting this volume together, and synthesizing the complex and often self-contradictory ideas of Freud into a coherent order. I would, however, criticize Gay's at times overbearing attempts to defend Freud against the many criticisms lobbied against him. This tendency was quite clear in Gay's notes and, at times, robbed the work of some of the complexity it might have otherwise expressed.
Freud was, as I've already said time and time again, a deeply varied thinker. Though he is maligned by many today, he can, indeed by credited with formalizing, if not wholly creating, some of the most central concepts of psychology, such as the concept of the unconscious mind and the therapeutic method. With some of the great insights Freud brings to the surface in these texts, I did, indeed, get a sense that the ferocity with which Freud is hated seems to be a little exaggerated.
That is not, however, to say that Freud was without flaws - because he certainly had his fair share. One of these, his refusal to entertain opposing theories and his downright childish jabs at them he leaves throughout his work (Freud often takes a massive detour from the subject of his papers to briefly lob a two-lined attack on Jung, for example), perhaps forced his opposition to get just as negative as he, leading to the so-called Freud Wars of the mid 20th Century. Additionally, there are plenty of times when he commits massive, earth-shaking mistakes in his work, such as the laughably bad anthropological work in Totem and Taboo, accompanying legitimately interesting theory, the priming of his patients, and the frequent projection Freud performed (ironically, after he himself popularized the phrase) on his patients regarding his own tragic childhood sexual trauma.
It is a common criticism of Freud to make but, like Jung, I'd say Freud has some enormous insights, but by placing that sexual drive at the center of all, creates an undue emphasis on the instinct. Though he convincingly links all manner of psychical processes to the sex drive, I would say this is more due to the interconnectedness of the mind, rather than any especial centrality of sexual libido. This was a view Freud himself began to mirror as he moved into the last phase of his career, and began emphasizing a general life drive vs a death drive (an idea which had its own issues, such as the lack of an evolutionary benefit to a death drive and Freud's lack of examples of such a drive).
His other biases, especially towards women, must be mentioned in any criticism of his work, as it at times grows glaringly obvious his rearing in a patriarchal society colors many of his judgements on the woman's mind.
When I criticize a thinker to this degree, I often like to find what I call their 'central problem'. I would say for Freud, this central problem was his confusion between science and philosophy. Freud vehemently denied philosophical relevance, instead choosing to align himself with the scientific field, as best illustrated by the final article in the volume, The Question of a Weltanschauung, in which he denies his body of work, represented by the psycho-analytic community, is representative of any particular philosophy or world view, and is, instead aligned only to the perfectly objective, perfectly rational, scientific method. Indeed, in Freud's mind, the mental structure of the ego, the id, and the superego was just as scientific as the anatomical structure of the human body. This, of course, is mistaken; Freud often neglected to use any sort of hard data, experimental controls, or recordings of information that gifts science its precision. Despite his hatred of philosophers, Freud works far better as one. Indeed, the central problem with Freud is, in my opinion, not so much with what he says, but with the fact that he claims it to be a science rather than a philosophy, or, as he would call it, a Weltanschauung, or worldview. When viewing Freud as a philosopher, though that might be a classification he would resent, one can appreciate his enormous contributions to human thought and the study of psychology, while appropriately remaining skeptical of his ideas overall.
Thus, as I found this reader to be very informative and interesting but not at all without flaws, I granted it a solid 3 stars.
(and hey, I managed to go a whole review of Freud without mentioning the Oedipus Complex! Anyways, it was gross.)
This book was a long and, at times, thoroughly difficult/academic read. It is not only bogged down by academic, medical language, but the now thoroughly outdated medical and psychological language of Freud's time. That being said, if you stick with it, this reader will take you on a journey through Freud's tumultuous and varied intellectual evolution. I found the ordering and selections of texts to be quite informative and Peter Gay did a masterful job putting this volume together, and synthesizing the complex and often self-contradictory ideas of Freud into a coherent order. I would, however, criticize Gay's at times overbearing attempts to defend Freud against the many criticisms lobbied against him. This tendency was quite clear in Gay's notes and, at times, robbed the work of some of the complexity it might have otherwise expressed.
Freud was, as I've already said time and time again, a deeply varied thinker. Though he is maligned by many today, he can, indeed by credited with formalizing, if not wholly creating, some of the most central concepts of psychology, such as the concept of the unconscious mind and the therapeutic method. With some of the great insights Freud brings to the surface in these texts, I did, indeed, get a sense that the ferocity with which Freud is hated seems to be a little exaggerated.
That is not, however, to say that Freud was without flaws - because he certainly had his fair share. One of these, his refusal to entertain opposing theories and his downright childish jabs at them he leaves throughout his work (Freud often takes a massive detour from the subject of his papers to briefly lob a two-lined attack on Jung, for example), perhaps forced his opposition to get just as negative as he, leading to the so-called Freud Wars of the mid 20th Century. Additionally, there are plenty of times when he commits massive, earth-shaking mistakes in his work, such as the laughably bad anthropological work in Totem and Taboo, accompanying legitimately interesting theory, the priming of his patients, and the frequent projection Freud performed (ironically, after he himself popularized the phrase) on his patients regarding his own tragic childhood sexual trauma.
It is a common criticism of Freud to make but, like Jung, I'd say Freud has some enormous insights, but by placing that sexual drive at the center of all, creates an undue emphasis on the instinct. Though he convincingly links all manner of psychical processes to the sex drive, I would say this is more due to the interconnectedness of the mind, rather than any especial centrality of sexual libido. This was a view Freud himself began to mirror as he moved into the last phase of his career, and began emphasizing a general life drive vs a death drive (an idea which had its own issues, such as the lack of an evolutionary benefit to a death drive and Freud's lack of examples of such a drive).
His other biases, especially towards women, must be mentioned in any criticism of his work, as it at times grows glaringly obvious his rearing in a patriarchal society colors many of his judgements on the woman's mind.
When I criticize a thinker to this degree, I often like to find what I call their 'central problem'. I would say for Freud, this central problem was his confusion between science and philosophy. Freud vehemently denied philosophical relevance, instead choosing to align himself with the scientific field, as best illustrated by the final article in the volume, The Question of a Weltanschauung, in which he denies his body of work, represented by the psycho-analytic community, is representative of any particular philosophy or world view, and is, instead aligned only to the perfectly objective, perfectly rational, scientific method. Indeed, in Freud's mind, the mental structure of the ego, the id, and the superego was just as scientific as the anatomical structure of the human body. This, of course, is mistaken; Freud often neglected to use any sort of hard data, experimental controls, or recordings of information that gifts science its precision. Despite his hatred of philosophers, Freud works far better as one. Indeed, the central problem with Freud is, in my opinion, not so much with what he says, but with the fact that he claims it to be a science rather than a philosophy, or, as he would call it, a Weltanschauung, or worldview. When viewing Freud as a philosopher, though that might be a classification he would resent, one can appreciate his enormous contributions to human thought and the study of psychology, while appropriately remaining skeptical of his ideas overall.
Thus, as I found this reader to be very informative and interesting but not at all without flaws, I granted it a solid 3 stars.
(and hey, I managed to go a whole review of Freud without mentioning the Oedipus Complex! Anyways, it was gross.)
April 11, 2025
4.5 stars rounded up, really. This reader is an impressive editorial achievement on Peter Gay’s part, he manages to piece together what feels like a meaningfully complete picture of Freud’s thinking as it developed over his life without too many omissions that feel inexcusable or inclusions that feel inexplicable. I am perhaps a bit perplexed that “Analysis Terminable and Interminable� wasn’t included as the final selection, but the choice to end on the broader Lecture 35, giving Freud’s thoughts on how psychoanalysis is situated as a discipline relative to science and religion, is probably better overall.
But really, I’m very impressed. This reader is the perfect option for anyone who wants to get acquainted with Freud’s writing, his thinking, and the origins of psychoanalysis, whether you intend to ever read more of his oeuvre more completely but desire a a picture of the whole before you get lost in the particulars, or whether you never intend to read Freud again.
This is maybe the first book it’s ever taken me a full year to read, lol. NOT a bingeable book if you’re trying to read with any integrity, at least not for me, but I can’t imagine anyone would approach it expecting that to be the case.
But really, I’m very impressed. This reader is the perfect option for anyone who wants to get acquainted with Freud’s writing, his thinking, and the origins of psychoanalysis, whether you intend to ever read more of his oeuvre more completely but desire a a picture of the whole before you get lost in the particulars, or whether you never intend to read Freud again.
This is maybe the first book it’s ever taken me a full year to read, lol. NOT a bingeable book if you’re trying to read with any integrity, at least not for me, but I can’t imagine anyone would approach it expecting that to be the case.
June 16, 2023
I know Sigmund Freud is a piece of shit, but I do give him lots of credit for being the founder of psychology. I don't like the guy by any means, but I appreciate his findings that led to what the study of psychology is today.
August 28, 2017
A wonderful introduction to Freud's key works, all with helpful explanatory front matter.
March 1, 2019
Excellent selection and overview of Freud's thought.
May 13, 2020
Een goede inleiding tot Freud, zij het dat vele van diens stellingen wat ver gezocht voor me bleken.
October 8, 2020
had to read for class i despise freud
October 31, 2020
nights deprived of sleep because of reading Freud
Read
October 12, 2021had to read the essay on sexuality for grad school
March 7, 2022
but have you actually READ freud?
March 19, 2022
Excellent. I’ve been reading this slowly for about two months. Not saying I understood everything I read (and I also did skip a few sections that I got lost in) but I found this fascinating.
July 13, 2022
Had to read this for a class-very boring
July 17, 2022
Rated 5 stars to understand Freud's arguments, but we do not agree with his conclusions on many levels. Incredibly important to understand what influenced an entire generation around the world.
February 8, 2023
It's relatively alright to read, even for someone who doesn't particularly enjoy Freud's theories or ideas.
Read
February 24, 2024BIG fan. thank you Mr. Tokita. you have trained me well.
December 28, 2024
why do all philosophers enjoy hurting my brain?
December 29, 2023
I’ve been reading Freud for a number of reasons: to remind myself of being in college, to challenge my under-stimulated brain, to further my personal investigation on the nature of the self.
It’s been an interesting companion to Nausea and Notes from Underground, whose existentialist beliefs would deny the existence of a self from which trauma and/or repression can spring.
It’s been an interesting companion to Nausea and Notes from Underground, whose existentialist beliefs would deny the existence of a self from which trauma and/or repression can spring.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 58 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.