You're working in a book shop. A timid young man enters

>>8665809
I would probably assume he wanted to read those books

I would feel sympathy for a person that (i suppose) isn't cucked by the conventional memefication of freud and wants to make up his own mind about Freuds revolutionary work on the human psyche.

I don't care about sense and sensibility

>>8665839
This, but I would also assume they would be relegated to a bookshelf after a few attempted reading sessions, never to be read again.

what a pleb! he has a small wiener! your mom!

>>8665844
what do you think is freud's best work? i think he gets too much "wacko" treatment, but at the same time i'm not sure how much i could get from him at this point, when his most important ideas have already been distilled and widely circulated

>>8665862
On the Psychical Mechanism of Hysterical Phenomena.

Hysteria seems to be a valid phenomena, all too readily discarded as sexist by dogmatists of both sexes.

>>8665868
i'll give it a go, thank you anon. you into jung also by any chance?

>>8665862
Best work is hard to say. The Interpretation of Dreams is his most important work. Generally i would recommend to first get his main concepts down, for this the 3 lectures on psychoanalysis are perfect. maybe some secondary literature as to have them explained in clear and precise ways. And then, as you are right about Freud having been distilled and circulated, move on to what interests you. If Freuds theory of dreams interests you, then read interpretation of dreams. You don't have to read all of it. His work on Mass Culture has been quite influential, his investigation on the artist is interesting as well etc. etc.

If you actually read Freud you will realize that he relativizes his own findings constantly, encourages deeper research and points out the "pioneer nature" of his work. Try to avoid the retardation of going with a pre-fabricated opinion of "hurr he's been proven wrong, he's outdated" into it. Freuds work, while having been transformed, reinterpreted and exposed in it's flaws, remains critical, enlightening (not in absolute terms) and essential to the understanding of the psyche and in more historical terms of the 20th perspective. You can always move on to other psychoanalysts that followed him, many of them will deny Freud but all share him as their foundation.

And if you find that it is rubbish and speculative bullshit, then first let me say that it is in many ways superior to mainstream empirical psychology since many of the phenomena that are discussed in our daily life (nagging voice at the back of my head, for example is one of those) or constantly repeated throughout art and other mediums can't be quantified via biopsychological or conventional empirical methods. It is psychoanalysis with it's "speculative empirical" model, that investigates them.

And secondly: Well in that case you atleast learned some history.

tl;dr: Start with The Three Lectures on Psychoanalysis

>>8665868
>Hysteria

It's like i'm in the 19th century again...

>>8665891
>all too readily discarded as sexist by dogmatists

>>8665888
thanks kindly too! i'll check that out as well. interesting you mention mass culture, i'll be happy to see that. i've read bernays' on propaganda (and bernays is freud's nephew) so it'll be cool to see any connections between their work

>>8665900
Not my point. Hysteria is what mental illness was generally classified before Psychoanalysis emerged. it is an outdated and simplistic diagnosis that has been replaced by a far more accurate and complex model of the psyche over 100 years ago. The regression that has taken place in psychology shows itself in the cluelessness that they face when confronted with such phenomenons as "hysteria". I'm not calling you a sexist.

>>8665904
You're clearly uninformed as to what hysteria is in the context of that particular book, but fwiw I agree with your statement wholeheartedly.

>>8665910
>Hysteria seems to be a valid phenomena

To be more precise, this is what i attacked. Just standing there like that it carries implications of what i have critisized. If you didn't mean it the way i interpreted it, i apologize. /lit/ makes me a bit jumpy when it gets to the topic of psychology.

>>8665920
Sorry, I can't go into detail in post because I'm on a phone and that was a mindless summary.
Curious about what you think of >>8665876 ?

Why does /lit/ only discuss what they will read and never what they have read?

>>8665946
I've read a book by him that was quite inspiring. His theory on archetypes and the unity of the human psyche are very interesting. It steers away from a scientific model (which freud never did) into a more speculative and mystical realm, which can be very thought-provoking.

>>8665839
>>8665851
These.

>>8665967
superego

>>8665975
You seem well read on the subject, but the only opinions I can eek out of people range from exactly what you've said, to "dude he's a genius lmao"
Is he more a curiosity than meritorious?

>>8665989
Depends on you. His work is profound and he describes his theoretical concepts in a lot of detail, backs them up with examples from religious symbolism, he especially draws back on alchemy. As a medical practice it has been succesfull in the US, but i think it's greatest merit is a philosophical or aesthetical one. After his work has influenced great works like Thomas Mann's The Magic Mountain or Hesse's Demian. So he definitely goes beyond being merely a curiosity. The collection of his essays on archetypes is relatively short and easy to read, so if you are interested go ahead and make up your own mind. Unlike my usual routine i read a work that described his theorys before i've read him, so it may have possibly influenced the impression he made on me, nonetheless i often find myself using his concepts as to explain certain phenomena.

I'm for example 100% sure that Lars von Trier's Antichrist is inspired by Jungs conception of Anima and Animus.

>>8665809
He's in a Victorian lit class, either undergrad or grad.

The young nigga just gettin his scuba gear to take the clunge plunge

>>8665809
a gift for mom

>>8666039
this guy is closest to the truth really

>>8666018
Nice post, thanks for this. You've bumped him up my backlog significantly.

>>8665809
That this man is a gentle, romantic soul. That by appealing to his need for understanding and comfort, I can possibly get him to show me his boipussy.

>>8666036
Austen wasn't Victorian