Response #2 – Eva Tam

From what I remember of my high school senior psychology class about Sigmund Freud, the psychoanalyst, was that he believed childhood experiences built up what a person would become in the future and if he would develop mommy or daddy issues such as the Oedipus or Electra complexes. I also remember that he was a firm believer in the body’s natural ability to regress meaning the mind’s defense system leading to the temporary or long-term return of the ego to an earlier stage of development rather than handling unacceptable desires in a more adult way. I think that Freud performed many studies and took observations of children because to him they would be able to explain various problems that people develop as an adult and they unlock some of the hidden complexities in the mind. All of this has something to do with what Freud explains in Chapter 2 of his text Beyond the Pleasure Principle about “children’s play,” and more specifically a game of “disappearance and return” or “fort da.”
Freud saw a specific correlation between pleasure and pain when he observed the son of the couple that he was staying with during the war. He watched as the little boy would throw his toys as far away as he could to the corners of the room or under the bed and loudly state “o-o-o-oh” which he meant as “go away” or “fort.” One clear portrayal of this was when he threw his wooden reel with a piece of string wound around it holding it by the string and watched as it disappeared on his cot. Then he would pull the string and the reel would reappear again or “Da” meaning “there.” The little boy seemed to intentionally allow himself to feel a sense of sadness when the toy was away in order to experience the joy it brings when he was successfully able to return it. Freud concludes that this game is a method in relating what the little boy feels to when his mother has to leave him alone for hours on end. Undoubtedly he feels a sense of pain because he has such a strong connection with her but when she finally returns, he is able to celebrate the fact. Because he needs a way to occupy his time during those long hours, he puts his feelings into his actions, performing this game over and over, in order to play out what will be the eventual reality. He is almost readying himself through this manner in order to achieve his optimal happiness of reuniting with his mother.
The little boy’s game of disappearance and return can loosely be related to Plato’s concept of the “allegory of the cave” in that they both show how in order to feel happiness one needs to experience a pain for comparison. This portrays the pleasure principle in which the body allows itself to feel an unpleasant hurt in order for it to strive towards the reward of pleasure associated with a kind of happiness. The little boy’s throwing of his toy to the point of disappearance can be seen as being in a cave where one’s happiness is diminished or perhaps hiding. However, once the toy is brought to reappearance it is like a person being removed from the shackles in the cave and being allowed to step into the light where so much beauty is displayed. It is a constant cyclical process in that no one can continually be happy but must enter a state of darkness or lowness in order to come back to the top where light reigns.
In class, when we were asked to formulate our own “allegory of the cave” comparison, I referred to happiness as being like a roller coaster. It is a slow steady rise to the top where there one can see everything in the park clearly. Once one reaches the peak, it might be a fast downward drop where one fears what is going to happen and might reach the point of being at the very bottom. Yet there is another peak that can be reached though it might be a smaller one and one has a larger momentum to reach it more quickly. Though one rides the roller coaster and experiences ups and downs and at different speeds, at the end of the ride one feels a sense of enjoyment, accomplishment and maybe even be as far to say he was happy to have gone through the experience.