{"id":147,"date":"2019-05-27T08:23:48","date_gmt":"2019-05-27T08:23:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/engp10.epgpbooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/?post_type=chapter&p=147"},"modified":"2019-05-28T12:31:10","modified_gmt":"2019-05-28T12:31:10","slug":"lionel-trilling-freud-and-literature","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp10\/chapter\/lionel-trilling-freud-and-literature\/","title":{"rendered":"Lionel Trilling: Freud and Literature"},"content":{"raw":"
\"epgp<\/a>\r\n<\/span><\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n

Objectives<\/strong><\/p>\r\n\u00a0<\/strong>\r\n

This module presents Lionel Trilling\u2019s essay \u201cFreud and Literature\u201d. The module aims at explaining Trilling\u2019s opinion about the influence of Freud\u2019s Psychoanalysis on Literature and its value in Literature on the one hand, the influences of Literature on Freud as a Psychoanalytic critic on the other.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Psychoanalysis as the culmination of the Romantic literary art<\/strong><\/p>\r\n\u00a0<\/strong>\r\n

Lionel Trilling\u2019s \"Freud and Literature\" is a criticism of Psychoanalysis and Literature developed before and after the birth of Psychoanalysis. The essay was published in The Kenyan Review <\/em>and later in his book Liberal Imagination <\/em>(LI). He observed the impact of Literature in the works of Sigmund\u00a0 Freud\u00a0 (1856-1939),\u00a0 the\u00a0 father\u00a0 of\u00a0\u00a0 Psychoanalysis.\u00a0\u00a0 Trilling\u00a0\u00a0 observed Psychoanalysis as culmination of the Romantic literary art. He regards Freudian\u00a0 conceptualization of mind, instinct, human nature, dream and interpretation of dreams as great influencing forces in the formulation of the act of writing literature. Thus we can understand \u201cFreud and Literature\u201d by tracing Trilling\u2019s three cardinal observations: that threads of the elements of psychoanalysis are found in the literature written ever before Freud; that Freud acknowledges literature as source of his conceptualizations; and that Freud\u2019s Psychoanalysis influenced literary criticism and literature written during and after the period of Freud.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Trilling justifies discusses how Romantic poets of 18th century, and works of great writers of all the times such as Denis Diderot (1713-1784), Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), and Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). For him, their works had successfully presented the hidden realities of life, man and his mind even before the inception of Psychoanalysis. As Diderot brought forth the idea of tripartite of mind, dream, repression of desire and its result far before Freudian psychoanalysis had come. He illustrated further his justification with reference to Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

He also demonstrates how contemporary literary writers of Freud like T.S. Eliot (1888-1965) and Proust (1871-1922) have espoused the role of the unconscious, exhibited broken self\u00a0 and distorted ideology of repression in their works, though they have never acknowledged the influence of Freud. Trilling acknowledges the influence of Freud on the Surrealists for \u201cthe \"scientific\" sanction of their program. Kafka (1883-1924) \u201chas explored\u00a0 the\u00a0 Freudian conceptions of guilt and punishment, of the dream, and of the fear of the father\u201d (Liberal\u00a0<\/em>Imagination <\/em>LI: 40). Thomas Mann (1875-1955) confessed that he \u201cwas always in the direction\u00a0 of Freud's interests, has been most susceptible to the Freudian anthropology, finding a special charm in the theories of myths and magical practices\u201d ((LI): 40). James Joyce\u2019s technique of narration and types of characterization exposes the state of their minds. Trilling\u00a0 notes\u00a0 that Joyce\u2019s use of \u201cwords as things and of words, which point to more than one thing\u201d (LI: 40) and his treatment with familial relationship, reactions of the self to\u00a0 the body exposes his inclination\u00a0 to psychological reality.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n

Trilling argues that Freud\u2019s postulations are the result of his reading the Romantic literature. For Trilling, the greatest masters of Romanticism had influenced Freud. The subject of both the theories rests on perception. The creeds of Romanticism and theory of Freud rests on the \u201cperception of the hidden element of human nature\u201d and \u201copposition between the hidden and the visible\u201d. Both rest on the unconscious and conscious, spirit and the body, morality, desire creates conflict, and this conflict is the subject of literature (esp. written in the period of romanticism or similar to it like Enlightenment, Transcendentalism). \u201cThe common characteristic of both Freud and Romanticism, the perception of the hidden element of human nature and of the opposition between the hidden and the visible,\u201d he contends (LI 36). In other words,\u00a0 Literature envisages\u00a0 the self of the writer with the reflection of both the hidden and the visible human predicaments. Trilling illustrates this notion with reference to Diderot, Rousseau, Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Blake.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Dream, repression of desire, erotic and sexual abnormality in literature<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Trilling\u2019s second argument justifies that literature envisions the elements of mind, which are the subjects of the theory of psychoanalysis. Freud\u2019s thesis rests on the repression of desire, which distracts the human mind and results into dreams. The dreams satisfy the repressed desire of\u00a0man. Morality stands after each repression of desire. In the world of Freudian theory, the desire stands for sexual desire. Trilling goes on saying that the \u2018sex revolution\u2019, sexual maladjustment, erotic feeling and their results on the self are the subject matter of works of P.B. Shelley, Schlegel\u2019s novel <\/span>Lucinde <\/em>(1799), and works of George Sand, Ibsen; Ludwig\u00a0 Tieck,\u00a0 Schopenhauer and Stendhal.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

Ambivalence in Literature<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\r\n\u00a0<\/strong>\r\n

Trilling describes that literary arts before the evolution of psychoanalysis expose the ambivalent state of mind of human being. Ambivalence is one of the results of repression. Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821-1881) has dramatized \u2018the mind as a divisible thing, one part of which can contemplate and mock the other.\u2019 He thinks that Dostoevsky\u2019s works are brilliant instances of ambivalent feeling.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

\u201cDeath wish\u201d and dream element in Literature<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\r\n\u00a0<\/strong>\r\n

Trilling observes the concept of death wish, sleep, self-destroying impulses in the poetry of Novalis, German poet who is known as a founder of Romanticism. Novalis is pseudonym of Friedrich Leopold, Freiherr von Hardenberg (1772-1801). The trait of hidden perception is traceable in the works of Shelley, Poe, and Baudelaire. Trilling has traced the elements of dream in the works of French symbolists like G\u00e9rard de Nerval, pseudonym of G\u00e9rard Labrunie (1808- 55), and Arthur Rimbaud (1854-1891). Trilling writes:<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Novalis brings in the preoccupation with the death wish, and this is linked on the one\u00a0 hand with sleep and on the other hand with the perception of the perverse, self-destroying impulses, which in turn leads us to that fascination by the horrible which we find in Shelley, Poe, and Baudelaire.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

\r\n

Trilling believes that Freud\u2019s experiment of psychoanalysis is an inspired experiment based on\u00a0 his interest in reading literature and its result. He called \u201cthe components of Zeitgeist\u201d (38) to the writers of such literature. Trilling said that Proust and Eliot was Freud\u2019s contemporary, yet none of them was reader of Freud\u2019s works, nor they followed Psychoanalysis. He argues that Freud\u2019s works have enriched the literary value. Literature, written under impression of Freud, has power to change the stream of thinking. It has made Literature a serious genre that tends to represent the complexity of the man\u2019s mind and life. Trilling has defined literature in the context of psychological realities of human beings.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Freud\u2019s ideas mostly influenced the Literary Critics and Biographers. Trilling observed that influence of Psychoanalysis made the critics and literary artists realize intrinsic value of a work\u00a0 of literary art. His impact challenged the possibility of partial judgment toward the writers. He remarks:<\/p>\r\n \r\n

I think it is true to say that now the motive of his interpretation is not that of exposing the secret shame of the writer and limiting the meaning of his work, but, on the contrary, that of finding grounds for sympathy with the writer and for increasing the possible significances of the work.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

However, he criticized Thomas Mann\u2019s views of Freud for he could not see the positivist and rationalist side of Freudian psychoanalysis. Trilling illustrates how Mann has apprehended the works of Freud. He defends Freud in the following words:<\/p>\r\n \r\n

If Freud discovered the darkness for science he never endorsed it. On the contrary, his rationalism supports all the ideas of the Enlightenment that deny validity to myth or\u00a0religion; he holds to a simple materialism, to a simple determinism, to a rather limited\u00a0\u00a0 sort of epistemology. No great scientist of our day has thundered so articulately and so fiercely against all those who would sophisticate with metaphysics the scientific\u00a0 principles that were good enough for the nineteenth century. Conceptualism or pragmatism is anathema to him through the greater part of his intellectual career, and this, when we consider the nature of his own brilliant scientific methods, has surely\u00a0 an\u00a0 element of paradox in it.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n

He justifies how positivism of Freud tempted us to comprehending life and its complexities, and, how his therapy tended to challenge the human complexities. Trilling has also observed Psychoanalysis as an exponent of the Enlightenment for its contention with the idea that religion does not civilize the human society but its chief function is to develop the self-recognition.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Trilling has appreciated Freud as an admirer of art for his interest in art of investigation of \u2018the hidden motives\u2019 in the character\u2019s action and conditions they have to face in their lives. He says, \u201cFreud is not insensitive to art on the contrary nor does he ever intend to speak of it with contempt.\u201d Freud appreciates specific emotional insights of literary writers, because they have understood the part played in life by the hidden motives. He appreciates Freud\u2019s thinking about Literature for Freud\u2019s idea of therapeutic function of the literary art. He also appreciates for how Freud seriously would take characters of literature, colors of paintings into critical consideration as if they were patients and subjects of his psychiatric wards or laboratory.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

However, Trilling discards Freud\u2019s early views on literature on four grounds:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n \t
  1. \u201cFreud speaks of art with what we must call contempt. Art, he tells us, is substitute gratification \/ and as such is \u201can illusion in contrast to reality\u201d.<\/li>\r\n \t
  2. Freud sees art as \u201calmost exclusively hedonistic\u201d.<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
  3. Art for Freud is a narcotic: \"the artist is virtually in the same category with the neurotic,\" Trilling discards Freud\u2019s views and supports Lamb's essay on \u201cThe Sanity of Art.\u201d Charles Lamb saw so clearly in his defense of the sanity of true genius: \u201cThe . . . poet dreams being awake. He is not possessed by his subject but he has dominion over it\u2019\u201d.<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
  4. \u00a0He quotes Freud and concedes that the Psychoanalytic method \u201ccan do nothing toward elucidating the nature of the artistic gift, nor can it explain the means by which the artist works-artistic techniques\u201d.<\/span><\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
    \r\n

    Lionel Trilling deprecates the way Freud has defined art as an illusory representation of life, which is harmless, his observations of the artist as dweller in the neurotic world, and his views\u00a0\u00a0 on the characters (esp. heroes) appeared in Literature as sufferers from neurosis. Freud declares that art is a \u201csubstitute gratification.\u201d The term \u201csubstitute gratification\u201d refers to a substituted pleasure gained from the satisfaction of a desire of a sufferer from neurosis. Trilling deprecates this notion made by Freud to literature as an illusion, and the author as a daydreamer and a neurotic. Trilling discards the views of Freud that pronounces the function of literature is akin to narcotic reactions.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Trilling deprecates Freud and defended literature by maintaining his idea that every scientific and rationalistic discovery begins from illusion and ends with reality. Literature juxtaposes both the illusion and reality that represent the life-truth i.e. the complexity. \u201cReality is an honorific word, and it means what is there; illusion is a pejorative word, and it means a response to what is\u00a0not there\u201d. Life is woven text of both the senses \u2018what is there\u2019 and \u2018what is not there\u2019;\u00a0 \u2018what is\u2019 and \u2018what is not\u2019 and vice versa. Literary artists empower their words to\u00a0 juxtapose\u00a0 these two unique senses of life. Thus, Trilling argues for literature is as much significant as psychoanalysis. Both Literature and Psychoanalysis live upon the subjects related to theories of unconscious apparatus, dream, and neurosis. The artist is not a sufferer from neurosis but the commander of his fantasies and emotions. Trilling supports his views by citing Charles Lamb\u2019s statement, \u201cThe \u2026 poet dreams being awake. He is not possessed by his subject but he has dominion over it\u201d. He clarifies a distinction between a creative artist\u2019s mind and a neurotic mind: \u201cThe poet is in command of his fantasy, while it is exactly the mark of the neurotic that he is possessed by his fantasy\u201d and, \u201cthe illusions of art are made to serve the purpose of a closer and truer relation with reality.\u201d In this regard, he alludes to French-American historian and critic Jacques Barzun (1907-2012) who has also depreciated Freud for this account and says that literature has always its concern with realities of life. But Trilling noted that Freud did not realize the truth of literature because he had instilled himself with hedonism. Hence Trilling\u00a0 called\u00a0 Freud a hedonist. He says, \u201cFreud's assumption of the almost exclusively hedonistic nature and purpose of art bar him from the perception of this\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n\r\nTrilling\u2019s views on Freud and Dr. Earnest Jones as Psychoanalytic Critics<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

    In chapter four of Interpretation of Dream <\/em>entitled, \u201cMaterial and Sources of Dreams,\u201d Freud has illustrated the concept of dream and the need of a new interpretation of Hamlet\u2019s procrastination. He has expressed his desire to see anyone read Hamlet as a victim of Oedipus complex and Hysteric with reference to the motive of Shakespeare\u2019s repressed desire and his deepest layer of impulses (Freud 283). Trilling\u2019s opinion rests on Freud\u2019s ideas as expressed below:<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n

    Shakespeare\u2019s Hamlet<\/em>, has its roots in the same soil as Oedipus Rex<\/em>. In the Oedipus <\/em>the child\u2019s wishful phantasy that underlies it is brought into the open and realized as it would be in a dream. In Hamlet <\/em>it remains repressed; and\u2014just as in the case of a neurosis\u2014we only learn of its existence from its inhibiting consequences. Strangely enough, the overwhelming effect produced by the more modern tragedy has turned out to be compatible with the fact that people have remained completely in the dark as to the hero\u2019s character. The play is built up on Hamlet\u2019s hesitations over fulfilling the task of revenge that is assigned to him; but its text offers no reasons or motives for these hesitations and an immense variety\u00a0 of attempts at interpreting them have failed to produce a result (Freud 282) \u2026 Hamlet is able to do anything\u2014except take vengeance on the man who did away with his father and took that father\u2019s place with his mother, the man who shows him the repressed wishes of his own childhood realized. Thus the loathing which should drive him on to revenge is replaced in him by self-reproaches, by scruples of conscience, which remind him that he himself is literally no better than the sinner whom he is to punish.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    The distaste for sexuality expressed by Hamlet in his conversation with Ophelia fits in very well with this: the same distaste which was destined to take possession of the poet\u2019s mind more and more during the years that followed, and which reached its extreme expression in Timon of Athens. <\/em>For it can, of course, only be the poet\u2019s own mind which confronts us in Hamlet.<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n

    Trilling appreciates Psychoanalysis as a new approach to literature for its power to illustrate realities of life and human mind controlled with cathexis. He also appreciates Freud\u2019s serious responses to Literature. Freud\u2019s disciple Dr. Earnest Jones has studied Hamlet as a creation of Shakespeare\u2019s \u201cintention\u201d or \u201cmotif\u201d. Trilling praises Dr. Franz Alexander\u2019s essay on Henry IV <\/em>for his liberal semantic treatment with the play but he does not treat Earnest Jones\u2019s attempt to find \u2018hidden motive\u2019 and \u2018deeper workings of Shakespeare\u2019s mind\u2019 in Hamlet with favor.\u00a0 He says:<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Hamlet is not merely the product of Shakespeare's thought, it is the very instrument of his thought, and if meaning is intention, Shakespeare did not intend the Oedipus motive or anything less than Hamlet; if meaning is effect then it is Hamlet which affects us, not the Oedipus motive.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    However, Trilling disagrees with the extremism of Freud\u2019s \u2018analytical method\u2019 to read literature and art. For Trilling, analytical method has two standpoints: explanation of the \"inner meanings\" of the work of art, and explanation of the \u201ctemperament of the artist as man\u201d. But, he never follows any sort of extremist approach to literature. He observed extremism opinion both in\u00a0 Freud and Jones\u2019s approaches to reading Shakespeare\u2019s Hamlet<\/em>. Thus, he\u00a0 justifies\u00a0 psychoanalysis as an unsuitable approach to literature but it remains an unsuitable approach in case it is used with extremism.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    The value of Literature lives upon its effect\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Trilling exemplifies things that increase the value of art. He cites Denis Diderot\u2019s Rameau<\/em>\u2019s Nephew <\/em>(1762) in this regard. Diderot\u2019s Rameau' s Nephew <\/em>is a story about a chance of meeting of the unnamed \u201cI\u201d with \u201cHe\u201d\u2014 the nephew of the composer, Rameau\u2014leads to a dialogue that covers many topics related to various follies and attitudes of French society of the time. The\u00a0work influenced the Enlightenment period. It maintained a great tradition of literary reading. Trilling regards the work for its literary power to influence the great minds of the world. Goethe translated this work, Marx admired it, and Hegel studied Rameau as \u201cdisintegrated\u00a0 consciousness\u201d (LI 35) and studied its author as honest consciousness. Shaw and Freud have also given their opinion both the unnamed characters of Diderot\u2019s <\/span>Rameau\u2019s Nephew <\/em>(35). What Trilling wants to say is that the selves described\u00a0 in the <\/span>Rameau <\/em>are much akin to id (Rameau)\u00a0 and ego (author). In all these opinions framed on Diderot\u2019s <\/span>Rameau\u2019s Nephew<\/em>, there is no Diderot\u2019s intention. Moreover, these opinions or interpretations are examples of decryption of literary value that lies in the effects of literature. Trilling argues for this literary value:<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n\r\n \r\n

    Changes in historical context and in personal mood change the meaning of a work and indicate to us that artistic understanding is not a question of fact but of value. Even if the author's intention were, as it cannot be, precisely determinable, the meaning of a work cannot lie in the author's intention alone. It must also lie in its effect.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    For Trilling, the critics\u2019 task is not to observe the meaning of a text by relating it to author\u2019s intention. The opinion justifies him as a new critic, though he never declares his belongings to a specific school of criticism. Ren\u00e9 Wellek justified it in his essay \u201cThe Literary Criticism of\u00a0 Lionel Trilling\u201d (1979).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Trilling\u2019s Views on Tragedy<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Trilling furthers his ideas with reference to Freud\u2019s later work Beyond the Pleasure Principle <\/em>(1920). Beyond the Pleasure Principle <\/em>is the result of Freud\u2019s dissatisfaction with the common human nature. It was published after the First World War and the Anti-Semitic period. Freud\u00a0lost his daughter due to the Jewish Holocaust. He had to live without shelter, companion, and relatives during the period. His books were burnt. In his early creative period, he gave little attention on the destructive instincts of human beings. He talked of dream as satisfying tool for the repressive desires of human beings, balance of tripartite mind, Eros and Libido as creative forces in human life. In <\/span>Beyond the Pleasure Principle <\/em>he added two cardinal points: the first point was about an irresolvable and irrefutable \u201cinstinct of death or destruction\u201d (<\/span>thanotos<\/em>) that works in silence in human action. The other one was the concept of transference according to which patient must know about his treatment and techniques through which he was being treated for his cure.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n\r\n \r\n

    In the last paragraph of part two of the chapter, entitled \u201cBeyond the Pleasure Principle\u201d of his book Beyond the Pleasure Principle<\/em>, Freud concludes that an unpleasant situation in a play\u00a0 causes the pleasure for the audience. This idea refers to Aristotle\u2019s idea of \u201ccatharsis\u201d\u2014the function of tragedy. He has observed that a child\u2019s play may have some motives: motives of pleasure. He observes the instinct prevails on the period of the adult developed as the result of imitation to play the games since one and half years. An adult audience, usually, watches the drama for gaining pleasure. The adults receive pleasure out of seeing the scenes in the drama embedded with the \u201cpity and fear\u201d. Freud says that the habit is driven by a destructive instinct, which develops a masochistic tendency in the man.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    But, Trilling discards any such the Freudian analysis. He says that the catharsis or pleasure\u00a0 gained by seeing the scenes embedded with the sense of pain, fear, terror, and pity purifies the audience\u2019s mind for it often develops an identification of the same sense of tragic or terror\u00a0situations in the audience. The actors on the stage develop the power in the audience to bear the utmost terrifying situation, if it comes to him. To this function of tragedy, he called \u201cmithridatic function.\u201d Thus Trilling reads into Freud\u2019s \u2018traumatic neurosis\u2019 a theory of the \"mithridatic function\" of tragedy. For Trilling, tragedy has \u201cmithridatic function by which tragedy is used as the homeopathic administration of pain to inure ourselves to the greater pain which life will force upon us. There is in the cathartic theory of tragedy, as it is usually understood, a conception of tragedy's function which is too negative and which inadequately suggests the sense of active mastery which tragedy can give\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n\r\n \r\n

    To conclude, Trilling in \u201cFreud and Literature\u201d clarifies that psychoanalysis is an experimental and new approach to understanding the hidden meaning of a text if it will be used with \u201cliberal imagination\u201d. If one uses psychoanalysis as an analytical method in the strict sense, it cannot embrace the goal for which Freud has formulated it.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Additional notes on the authors cited in Trilling\u2019s \u201cFreud and Literature\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), Austrian physician, neurologist, and founder of\u00a0 psychoanalysis, who created an entirely new approach to the understanding of human personality. Schopenhauer (1788-1860), German philosopher, is known for his philosophy of pessimism. He disagrees with Hegelian truth and explains how the desire of life in man brings forth problems and suffering.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), German philosopher, poet, and classical philologist, was one of the most provocative and influential thinkers of the 19th century. He was deeply influenced by Schopenhauer.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Marcel Proust (1871-1922), French writer, wrote the 16-volume \u00c0 la recherche du temps perdu <\/em>(1913-27), the lengthy cyclic novel known in English as Remembrance of Things Past <\/em>(1922-31) and regarded as one of the greatest achievements in world literature.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Franz Kafka (1883-1924), Austrian (Czech) Jewish novelist and short-story writer, whose disturbing, symbolic fiction, written in German, prefigured the oppression and despair of the late 20th century.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Thomas Mann (1875-1955), a German novelist, essayist, and short-story writer, a Nobel laureate and one of the most prominent and influential European writers of the 20th century.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Friedrich von Schlegel, worked as editor of journals like Europa <\/em>and Concordia<\/em>, and delivered lectures on Philosophy, History, and Literature. He is regarded for his most important work On the Language and Wisdom of India <\/em>(1808). His most controversial novel Lucinde <\/em>(1799; translated 1913-1915) was perhaps responded by Dorothea Veit\u2019s novel Florentin <\/em>(1801). The novel is based upon issues related to romantic irony of sex and sexualities.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    George Sand (1804-1876), pseudonym of Amandine Aurore Lucile, Baronne Dudevant, French novelist of the Romantic Movement, whose irregular life and many love affairs shocked Parisian society.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Ludwig Tieck (1773-1853), a leading German Romantic writer. He worked on folktales, which were translated by Carlyle. His plays inspired Brecht, Genet, and Beckett. He influenced surrealism. His prose work Aur\u00e9lia <\/em>(1853-54) blends the themes of lost love and religious salvation. The stories in Daughters of Fire <\/em>(1922) notably \u201cSylvie,\u201d are eerie reminiscences of lost youth and lost beauty. The sonnets in Les chim\u00e8res <\/em>(1854) are dominated by a sense of despair.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
    you can view video on Lionel Trilling: Freud and Literature<\/strong><\/td>\r\n\"\"<\/a><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>\r\n

    Reference<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n