the Biography Case
Autor: jonnybrew • April 17, 2013 • Essay • 554 Words (3 Pages) • 2,000 Views
Before we can explore whether or not violation is inevitable in the writing and reading of biography, we must first consider what defines “violation” in this context. We can then use this definition to form an opinion. One way to judge this is to ascertain whether the subject of the biography has any kind of an authorial presence within the writing, or whether the biographer has assumed complete control over the narrative, and to see if this has any effect over the validity of the biography or the way we see the subject.
In Sigmund Freud’s biography of “Dora”, the author’s voice is dominant over the subject’s. He establishes this from the very beginning of the piece by choosing to spend the opening four pages of the paper recapping his conclusions from his earlier paper, the “Interpretation of Dreams”, and outlining his theories. He then introduces “Dora” (a pseudonym) to the reader as “the eighteen-year-old girl who is the subject of this paper” and we are not actually told the name he has given her for some time, when he writes “The patient, whom I shall in future give the name of ‘Dora’”.
Freud, Sigmund. ‘Dora, the clinical picture’. In: Case histories 1: “Dora” and “Little Jans”. London: Penguin, 1990, p.51Freud’s choice of words in this sentence is important. He establishes his dominance by saying “I shall in future give the name”. It shows that Freud chose the name, implying a lack of control on the subject’s part. The very fact it is a pseudonym, though necessary, undermines the subject’s status in the biography. With the other characters in the narrative remaining nameless, Freud is the only authorial presence and this theme
...