Yerushalmi Y H
Int J Psychoanal. 1989;70 ( Pt 3):375-95.
Despite Freud's explicit statements on his intentions in writing Moses and Monotheism, there has been a growing tendency to interpret the work as a coded document of his inner life. Moreover, it has been known for some time that the original subtitle of the book had been: 'Ein historischer Roman' ('A Historical Novel'). This phrase in itself would seem to validate a reading of the book as a kind of personal fiction, especially since the German Roman can also easily be associated with the 'Family romance' (Familienroman). This paper argues on a number of levels that before subjecting the book to psychoanalytic exegesis every effort should be made to understand its conscious intentionality. Focusing on the abortive subtitle, the core of the paper is a close examination of the original manuscript draft of Moses and Monotheism, completed in 1934. From Freud's introduction, published here for the first time, it becomes clear that he employed the subtitle merely to indicate his own awareness that he had not found sufficient independent historical data to fully corroborate his reconstruction. In this sense, however, he claimed that modern biblical scholars are also historical novelists. They, no less than he, must resort to speculation, the only difference lying in the modes employed and the explanatory power of the results. Finally, the paper considers Freud's position on the problem of 'art' versus 'science' generally and his own self-perception in this regard.
尽管弗洛伊德就其撰写《摩西与一神教》的意图做出了明确表述,但将这部作品解读为其内心生活的隐秘记录的倾向却与日俱增。此外,人们早就知道这本书原来的副标题是:“Ein historischer Roman”(“一部历史小说”)。这个表述本身似乎就证实了将这本书视为一种个人化虚构作品的解读方式,尤其是因为德语中的“Roman”也很容易与“家族罗曼史”(Familienroman)联系起来。本文从多个层面论证,在对这本书进行精神分析阐释之前,应尽一切努力去理解其有意识的意图。聚焦于这个未被采用的副标题,本文的核心是对1934年完成的《摩西与一神教》原始手稿草稿进行仔细研读。从首次在此发表的弗洛伊德的引言中可以清楚地看出,他使用这个副标题仅仅是为了表明自己意识到没有找到足够独立的历史资料来充分证实他的重构。然而,从这个意义上说,他声称现代圣经学者也是历史小说家。他们和他一样,都必须诉诸推测,唯一的区别在于所采用的方式以及结果的解释力。最后,本文探讨了弗洛伊德在一般意义上关于“艺术”与“科学”问题的立场以及他在这方面对自己的认知。