Difference between revisions of "Sadism/Masochism"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | "[[sadism]]/[[masochism]]" ([[Fr]]. ''[[sadisme]]''/''[[masochisme]]'') | |
| − | + | ==Sigmund Freud== | |
| − | The terms | + | The terms "[[sadism]]" and "[[masochism]]" were coined by Krafft-Ebing in 1893, with reference to the [[Marquis de Sade]] and Baron Sacher von Masoch. |
Krafft-Ebing used the terms in a very specific sense, to refer to a [[sexual]] [[perversion]] in which [[sexual]] [[satisfaction]] is dependent upon inflicting [[pain]] on others ([[sadism]]) or upon experiencing [[pain]] oneself ([[masochism]]). | Krafft-Ebing used the terms in a very specific sense, to refer to a [[sexual]] [[perversion]] in which [[sexual]] [[satisfaction]] is dependent upon inflicting [[pain]] on others ([[sadism]]) or upon experiencing [[pain]] oneself ([[masochism]]). | ||
| − | When [[Freud]] took up the terms in his [[Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality]], he used them in the same sense as Krafft-Ebing.<ref> | + | When [[Freud]] took up the terms in his ''[[Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality]]'', he used them in the same sense as Krafft-Ebing.<ref>{{F}} 1905d</ref> |
Following Krafft-Ebing, [[Freud]] posited an intrinsic connection between [[sadism]] and [[masochism]], arguing that they are simply the [[active]] and [[passive]] aspects of a single [[perversion]]. | Following Krafft-Ebing, [[Freud]] posited an intrinsic connection between [[sadism]] and [[masochism]], arguing that they are simply the [[active]] and [[passive]] aspects of a single [[perversion]]. | ||
| + | ==Jacques Lacan== | ||
[[Lacan]] too argues that [[sadism]] and [[masochism]] are intimately related, both being related to the invocatory [[drive]]<ref>{{S11}} p.183</ref> | [[Lacan]] too argues that [[sadism]] and [[masochism]] are intimately related, both being related to the invocatory [[drive]]<ref>{{S11}} p.183</ref> | ||
Both the [[masochist]] and the [[sadist]] locate themselves as the [[object]] of the invocatory [[drive]], the [[voice]]. | Both the [[masochist]] and the [[sadist]] locate themselves as the [[object]] of the invocatory [[drive]], the [[voice]]. | ||
| − | However, whereas [[Freud]] argues that [[sadism]] is primary, [[Lacan]] argues that [[masochism]] is primary, and [[sadism]] is derived from it: | + | However, whereas [[Freud]] argues that [[sadism]] is primary, [[Lacan]] argues that [[masochism]] is primary, and [[sadism]] is derived from it: "sadism is merely the disavowal of masochism."<ref>{{Sll}} p.186</ref> |
| − | "sadism is merely the disavowal of masochism."<ref>{{Sll}} p.186</ref> | ||
| − | Thus, whereas the [[masochist]] prefers to experience the [[pain]] of [[existence]] in his own [[body]], the [[sadist]] rejects this [[pain]] and forces the [[Other]] to bear it | + | Thus, whereas the [[masochist]] prefers to experience the [[pain]] of [[existence]] in his own [[body]], the [[sadist]] rejects this [[pain]] and forces the [[Other]] to bear it.<ref>{{Ec}} p.778</ref> |
| − | [[Masochism]] occupies a special place among the [[ | + | [[Masochism]] occupies a special place among the [[perversion]]s, just as the invoking [[drive]] occupies a privileged place among the partial [[drive]]s; it is the "limit-experience" in the attempt to go ''beyond'' the [[pleasure principle]]. |
| − | + | ==See Also== | |
| − | + | * [[Drive]] | |
| − | + | * [[Perversion]] | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
== References == | == References == | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | |||
[[Category:Sexuality]] | [[Category:Sexuality]] | ||
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]] | [[Category:Jacques Lacan]] | ||
[[Category:Terms]] | [[Category:Terms]] | ||
[[Category:Concepts]] | [[Category:Concepts]] | ||
| − | [[Category: | + | [[Category:Dictionary]] |
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]] | [[Category:Psychoanalysis]] | ||
Revision as of 21:01, 30 July 2006
"sadism/masochism" (Fr. sadisme/masochisme)
Sigmund Freud
The terms "sadism" and "masochism" were coined by Krafft-Ebing in 1893, with reference to the Marquis de Sade and Baron Sacher von Masoch.
Krafft-Ebing used the terms in a very specific sense, to refer to a sexual perversion in which sexual satisfaction is dependent upon inflicting pain on others (sadism) or upon experiencing pain oneself (masochism).
When Freud took up the terms in his Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, he used them in the same sense as Krafft-Ebing.[1]
Following Krafft-Ebing, Freud posited an intrinsic connection between sadism and masochism, arguing that they are simply the active and passive aspects of a single perversion.
Jacques Lacan
Lacan too argues that sadism and masochism are intimately related, both being related to the invocatory drive[2]
Both the masochist and the sadist locate themselves as the object of the invocatory drive, the voice.
However, whereas Freud argues that sadism is primary, Lacan argues that masochism is primary, and sadism is derived from it: "sadism is merely the disavowal of masochism."[3]
Thus, whereas the masochist prefers to experience the pain of existence in his own body, the sadist rejects this pain and forces the Other to bear it.[4]
Masochism occupies a special place among the perversions, just as the invoking drive occupies a privileged place among the partial drives; it is the "limit-experience" in the attempt to go beyond the pleasure principle.
See Also
References
- ↑ Freud, Sigmund. 1905d
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book XI. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, 1964. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1977. p.183
- ↑ Template:Sll p.186
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p.778
