Kaplan D M
J Am Psychoanal Assoc. 1988;36(2):259-93. doi: 10.1177/000306518803600201.
The psychoanalysis of art has been a lively activity for virtually a century, ever since Freud first likened certain findings of his self-analysis to certain turns of plot in Oedipus Rex and Hamlet. Yet over this time a lack of clarity has persisted with respect to the kind of knowledge applied psychoanalysis achieves and its means of justification. Starting with the observation that clinical and applied psychoanalysis are, in every respect, radically different endeavors, this paper goes on to identify some ends and means of the psychoanalytic study of art and to suggest a few criteria of adequacy for the outcomes of such study.
自弗洛伊德首次将其自我分析的某些发现与《俄狄浦斯王》和《哈姆雷特》中的某些情节转折相类比以来,对艺术的精神分析实际上已经活跃了近一个世纪。然而,在这段时间里,关于应用精神分析所获得的知识类型及其正当性手段,一直存在着不清晰之处。从临床精神分析和应用精神分析在各方面都是截然不同的活动这一观察出发,本文进而确定了艺术精神分析研究的一些目的和手段,并为这类研究的结果提出了一些适当性标准。