[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 267 KB, 1200x1200, gettyimages-613470752jpg-13-31-39-121.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19383881 No.19383881 [Reply] [Original]

>A similar view of a homosexually inclined but chaste Leonardo appears in a famous 1910 paper by Sigmund Freud, Leonardo da Vinci, A Memory of His Childhood, which analysed a memory Leonardo described of having been attacked as a baby by a bird of prey that opened his mouth and "stuck me with the tail inside my lips again and again.”

>According to Freud, this was a childhood fantasy based on the memory of sucking his mother's nipple. He backed up his claim with the fact that Egyptian hieroglyphs represent the mother as a vulture, because the Egyptians believed that there are no male vultures and that the females of the species are impregnated by the wind.

>However, Freud's premise was based on an erroneous translation of the bird as a vulture, leading him in the direction of Egyptian mythology, when it was actually a kite in Leonardo's story. This disappointed Freud because, as he confessed to Lou Andreas-Salomé in a letter of 9 February 1919, he regarded the Leonardo essay as "the only beautiful thing I have ever written".

I can’t believe this fucking charlatan hack ended up becoming one of the most influential people in modern history

>> No.19383924

>>19383881
The next time I think I want an insight on art history, I'll remember not to look at Freud for it, a thing which I would commonly do otherwise. You sure showed all of 4chan's rabid Freud defenders!

Seriously, I was reading Lacan's Seminar XI yesterday, and he basically concedes that Freud's culture criticism is a bit shit, in somewhat veiled language, as is his own.

>> No.19383952

>>19383881
Nobody even pretends he was a genius or particularly great mind. He was merely willing to transgress the public discourse at a time and in a way such that society was ready to hear it. On the scale of genius that dies in obscurity to moronic industry plant, I think most people would agree Freud is right on the line between insight and luck.

>> No.19384064

>>19383952
Very sensible comment, but I hate him nonetheless.

>> No.19384135

>>19384064
I don't hate him because without him we wouldn't have Jung

>> No.19384779

>>19383881
Same thing could be said of most philosophers

>> No.19385049

>>19383952
He was genius, just not a genius in the contemporary sense of making lots of money or hard science. Talk therapy, the idea that we are not conscious of our desire, the mind is not a matter of biology, effects of trauma, the importance of socialization during childhood, sexual health. Founded the field of psycho-analysis, which was the foundation of psychology. His influence his endless and he's hardly been refuted completely. So much of his work has been vindicated retroactive, but not all of it.

Calling Freud a charlatan hack would be to call Aristotle a charlatan hack because of his theory of physics.

>> No.19385058

>>19383881
He’s a Jew, that’s why he’s famous

>> No.19385084

>>19385049
Talk therapy was invented by Bertha Pappenheim when she got sick of Breuer hypnotizing her. Freud popularized it and theorized it, but it was Anna O's invention.

>> No.19385094

>>19383881
Why does this anecdote make him a charlatan?

>> No.19385102

>>19383881
So he made a mistake and then owned up to it in his own lifetime? This diminishes your opinion of him? You're a moron, OP

>> No.19386237

>>19383881
I would rather a Freud who owns up to a failed investigation than a Marx who necessitated an elaborate fantasy to ground an already failed one

>> No.19386535

>>19383924
>I was reading Lacan
You're better off reading Freud. At least he was sincerely trying to build a theory.