Human development is clearly the topic of analysis for both these writers. What’s interesting is how the writers go about approaching this specific focus. You have Freud relating it to children at play, and Daniel Gilbert making an allegory of “the cave”. Whatever the case may be, when it came down to the interpretation of psychological development, I began to see relations between Gilbert and Freud. Both writers would agree in saying, our childhood subconsciously affects our adulthood.
Freud believes that we gain pleasure by replaying or reminiscing on a painful, unforgettable memory because we are aware of the pleasurable outcome that came with it. But what if there wasn’t a positive outcome? What if, nothing came out of this brutal experience or altercation? Then what?
I didn’t even consider Freud’s ideas until I read Chapter 2 of Beyond the Pleasure Principle. He focuses his observations on an eighteen-month-old child named Ernst. Specifically, the reoccurring game the boy plays, when his mother leaves him home for several hours on end, called
“Fort Da”. The game consists of the young boy throwing a toy out of his personal space, and shortly after, retrieving it. The act of throwing the toy was directly related with the mother leaving the son. Retrieving the toy was related to the mothers return. Obviously the throwing of the toy, and the disappearance of the mother was seen as the painful moment. However, the act of retrieving the toy would be seen as the positive outcome. This is where the boy found pleasure. This game was a way for the boy to cope with the absence of his mother. He was aware of the pleasurable outcome of his mom eventually coming home, and because of that, this game was his way of looking forward to his mothers return. It interests me how Freud was able to relate a psychological concept to an eighteen-month-old baby. This eighteen-month-old baby was able to validate Freud’s pleasure/pain principle.
In comparisons to Freud’s “fort da”, the “allegory of the cave” might seem a little farfetched and improbable. Chaining up prisoners since childhood and expecting them to learn from this experience seems like torture to me. Plato relates the cave to the prisoner’s wisdom. He believes that this inhumane experience that can also be viewed as a game will subconsciously affect our adulthood. There were four stages to the cave. Once they were all completed, the prisoners would have taken with them a better understanding of the world surrounding them.
The game, “Fort Da”, and the “allegory of the cave” can both be seen as coping mechanisms. Freud and Gilbert approach the topic in different ways, but ultimately have similar stances when it’s all said and done. The eighteen month old was coping with the absence of his mother, and the prisoners went thru these inhumane stages in the cave, for a better understanding of the world that surrounds them. Happiness is sacrificed in both readings to formulate a true sense of it later on.
from Laura Cvikevich
