Freud and trauma

There is so much going on in this little book "Beyond the Pleasure Principle" that I'm not sure where to begin, but I'll try by addressing the effects of trauma on the brain. According to Freud, (or at least my understanding from the essay) pleasure and "unpleasure" result from "excitation" to external or even internal stimuli. Trauma such as "war neuroses" and "traumatic neuroses" result from a breach in the brain's "protective shield" which is supposed to limit and control the exposure of all stimuli. The effects of this breach are twofold: first the trauma creates an over abundance of stimuli and then attempts to repress or bury the traumatic event which fuels the reaction to such stimuli. The role of the psychoanalyst then is to try and help the traumatized person both engage these repressed/buried memories while simultaneously trying to put them in their proper place as being part of the past. Thus removing the fear of repeated trauma by showing that there is no longer an imminent threat to the life and wellbeing of the traumatized. That is my understanding of the essay anyway.

To take this further, (or bring Freud's BPP to the present understanding of PTSD), the brain's reaction to trauma can have several manifestations: an inability to separate the traumatic event from the present (as in flashbacks, nightmares, etc) as well as an attempt at numbing the anxiety, fear, anger and despair (helplessness?) that are associated with having been witness to such a traumatic event. For example, Spiegelman's book (in response to 9/11) shows Spiegelman not only in his present form but also in varying forms of dissociation and victimization, all of which is a result not only of the immediate trauma (9/11) but also the repetition of that trauma by the mainstream media and politicians. The open wound is not allowed to heal nor is the mind allowed to even process the incessant stream of propaganda born out of the ashes of the fallen towers. By keeping the American public unflinchingly and unblinkingly focused upon its own victimization, the government "terrorizes" and "traumatizes" them into submission through fear. Fear that if we do not act immediately, more attacks will come. Fear that if we do not show unity and unquestioning faith in "our values" the 'terrorists' have won. Fear. Fear. Fear. The terror warning chart in all of its rainbow vibrancy serves to both regulate the American public's pulse but also to quicken it, to make sure that people are constantly reminded of that day and of the violence/horror of it but also of how it haunts and remains a threat. Tying this then to Benjamin's essay on fascism's manipulation of public perception through mass produced images and art, 9/11 gave the Bush government the opportunity to curb civil liberties and human rights (as in Patriot Act and the holding of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay), to bypass international law (as in preemptive war) and to significantly bolster the military-industrial complex: corporations, weapons manufacturing, forced expansion of foreign markets, etc. These actions are fascist. What is most ingenious though is the ability of the media to not only convince the American people that the lessening of freedom = security but also that questioning the necessity of which is unpatriotic or even treasonous. This was accomplished in many ways but perhaps none so clever as the use of repeated images of the planes hitting the twin towers and them collapsing and finally, the flag. Osama's face also graced the cover of countless magazines and cartoons all illustrating American might and Right. The flag became not only a way unifying the country in the face of such suffering and disbelief but also, a rallying cry for vengeance and war. Remembering and vowing to "never forget the sacrifice" (of those lost in the towers, in the planes, the rescue workers, the survivors, and now the soldiers) became not questioning the government's unilateral power in deciding exactly how best to "keep America safe." How does this relate to Freud? Well, he offers the story of a child who uses play to engage and gain control over the loss he feels when his mother is not spending all of her time tending to him. He explains that the child's game of lost and found is his way of entertaining and reassuring himself that the loss is not permanent. It is also his way, through engaging in the trauma of loss repeatedly, to gain some power over it. To control it. To make sense of it for himself. I think this is the same way we as a nation act with regard to 9/11. We want very much to gain some power over that feeling of powerlessness that the terrorist attacks left and so we not only accept the repetition of images and allusions to 9/11 that the media and politicians feed us, we look to them as a space of definition as if our nation was born again on that day, united, if only in the trauma of loss. The media says don't forget. We also say, we cannot forget. But why? What is to be gained by continuing to carry and reopen that wound over and over, to the point to which it defines us as "Americans"? Others have argued that this government needs its people to remain in a state of constant fear if it is to continue calling war, peace and imperialism, democracy. It is interesting to think about 9/11 in relation to the "war neuroses" or PTSD that Freud spoke of and how by recognizing the power of a traumatic event to continue dominating our inner landscape well after the event itself has occurred, is itself a path of being freed from such domination. Freud suggests that this has to come from being able to access the traumatic memories but also to put them in their proper context (as in that they are part of the past, not the present). So, the mass proliferation of flags and shirts and ceremonies promote fear not the freedom from that fear. Spiegelman's book explains this best when he finally turns away from the constant barrage of images and "terror" to old comics that returned to him the feeling of being safe. More on this later. Peace!