Good marks for Freud?

The New Neo Posted on by

Long-term psychotherapy, especially of the Freudian type, has gone out of style. Perhaps that’s because we’ve become more impatient these days. Or perhaps it’s due to the fact that psychotherapy seems more an art than a science, and an expensive one at that.

But here’s an article claiming that in many cases Freudian therapy achieves longer-lasting positive results than shorter therapies do. The patients in the two studies cited had been diagnosed with “complex mental disorders” and/or borderline personality disorder (the latter is a problem that is notoriously difficult to treat). Such findings are encouraging for the talking cure, pointing to the fact that shorter and simpler is not always better in the therapy biz.

Of course, this may not matter to the insurers who reimburse for therapy; they’ve been cutting back on coverage for quite some time, for obvious cost-saving reasons. The type of treatment tested in these particular studies—in the second one, eighteen months of individual therapy followed by eighteen months of group—would rack up quite a hefty bill indeed.

However, although the article claims to be about Freudian therapy, it really seems to concern long-term psychotherapy, which is a somewhat different animal. Although Freud’s work is the historic foundation for long-term psychotherapy, it is hardly identical to it, but is instead a small and very specific subset of the genre, practiced by very few therapists today. In fact, I doubt very much that the research cited here investigated classic Freudian therapy at all, although I’d have to go to the studies themselves itself to determine whether that is true.

Freudian therapy had/has a number of very specific techniques with which it is associated, among them the familiar lying-on-the-couch routine. Others are word association and dream analysis. Freud used these tools as the primary ways he tried to get at the underpinnings of patients’ psyches, believing them to be the royal roads to unlocking the ways in which patients were held in thrall to the workings of their unconscious minds and drives.

Let’s take the Freudian couch. It’s been celebrated in popular culture, especially cartoons. Here’s one classic from Gary Larson:

psychiatry-couch2.jpg

Cute. Except that Freud suggested the couch be positioned so that the patient could not see the psychiatrist’s face, the better to foster transference, and to relax the patient and make free-association more free.

Here’s a cartoon than shows the proper placement of both parties:

therapistcouch.jpg

The couches in both cartoons are rather spare. But the couch the historical Freud used for patients in his office was surprisingly and charmingly ornate:

freud-couch.jpg

Note the position of the chair, placed where the patient cannot see the doctor’s face. And here’s one of Freud himself demonstrating, complete with cigar (or is it cigarette?):

freudcouch2.jpg

Less news is good news—for now

The New Neo Posted on by

Have you noticed a certain flatness in the news lately?

The election is over. Bush-bashing is no longer so much fun—nor so necessary—because he’s on the way out. Very very soon, they won’t have him to kick around anymore— although I’m pretty sure they’ll keep on trying.

Iraq is relatively stable, and thus off the media radar screen. Israel and Palestine are—Israel and Palestine. The economy is bad, but that’s not news, and now the initial shock is over. Obama is waiting in the wings, but hasn’t really done much except make appointments and speeches, and bare his torso in Hawaii.

Will the lull last a while? Or is this the calm before the storm?:

And all the news just repeats itself
Like some forgotten dream that we’ve both seen.
Someday I’ll go and call up Rudy,
We worked together at the factory.
But what could I say if he asks “What’s new?”
“Nothing, what’s with you? Nothing much to do.”

Well, even though the news seems to be repeating itself lately, that most assuredly won’t last long. Remember the pre-9/11 summer of 2001, when the biggest stories were about shark attacks?

Real news of import is always a surprise, always unexpected. That’s why it’s called news.

The recession: don’t worry, be happy

The New Neo Posted on by

Depressed about the recession? If you are, research indicates that, unless you are directly affected by losing your job or some other dramatic loss, the downturn in your mood won’t last long. And even if you have been directly affected in a fairly dramatic way, you probably won’t remain depressed for long unless that’s your natural tendency anyway.

It turns out that, just as money can’t buy you love, it can’t buy you happiness—at least, not much, and not permanently. But even if there are a few depressed people around, they’re not as likely to have a depressive effect on others:

The reason: sorrow does not spread nearly as readily as joy. Nicholas Christakis, one of the study’s authors, says happy people form groups and socialize. Unhappy people spend more time alone, not always by choice. “Do you want to hang out with an unhappy person?” says Christakis, who teaches sociology at Harvard. “My feeling is that happiness declines during recessions, but I am not sure how much.”

[ADDENDUM: Here’s a piece on what makes for happiness—at least, according to psychology research. Turns out that some of it is genetic—about 50%, as with so many things. And other important factors are the somewhat corny and cliched, but nevertheless important, acts of counting one’s blessings, finding meaning in one’s life, and altruistic endeavors. ]

Obama’s choice: FDR or Reagan?

The New Neo Posted on by

Well, it may be Pat Buchanan saying it, but I still agree with him: Obama has a choice between the FDR approach to the Great Depression, policies that made it “greater”—that is, longer and more damaging—than it otherwise would have been; and the more successful Reagan approach to the recession of 1980.

But Buchanan ignores the one thing both FDR and Reagan had in common: an abiding optimism and the ability to convey it. They exuded confidence.

There is something very different and disturbing about Obama’s message, and that is his deep pessimism about America. Despite the lip service paid to the hope/change campaign message of uplift, his negativity comes through loud and clear.

Of course, Obama’s latest economic speech is being given in the context of trying to motivate legislation he will be proposing, especially his huge and controversial stimulus package, which jumps (rather than wades) into deep and uncharted waters. But if you read excerpts from his speech, you will see how extraordinarily gloomy it is, couched in the language of the dire consequences of what could happen if Obama’s plan isn’t realized.

The remedy? Why, big government, that’s what:

Mr. Obama insisted that only government could “break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy,” prevent “the catastrophic failure of financial institutions,” restart the flow of credit and restore the regulations needed to prevent such a crisis in the future.

Not only is big government the one and only answer, according to Obama, but the changes he proposes have to occur as soon as possible:

For every day we wait or point fingers or drag our feet, more Americans will lose their jobs,” Mr. Obama warned. “More families will lose their savings. More dreams will be deferred and denied. And our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.”

For some contrast, let’s have the words of FDR in his First Inaugural, facing a situation far worse than that Obama faces today:

This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself””nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory…Yet our distress comes from no failure of substance. We are stricken by no plague of locusts. Compared with the perils which our forefathers conquered because they believed and were not afraid, we have still much to be thankful for. Nature still offers her bounty and human efforts have multiplied it. Plenty is at our doorstep, but a generous use of it languishes in the very sight of the supply…

We can argue over the proper policy to institute in order to deal with the financial crisis, and the Left and Right certainly will do so. But I don’t think there’s any argument about the fact that Obama is striking exactly the wrong tone, if economic recovery is what he is really after.

Palin agrees that it’s the class war, stupid

The New Neo Posted on by

Back in September I wrote that much of the vicious bias against Sarah Palin was a result of her being from the wrong side of the tracks—the Walmart side. Now Palin is on the record as acknowledging the class issue in an interview with conservative filmmaker John Ziegler.

Palin feels that Caroline Kennedy’s upscale bona fides have caused her to be been handled by the press with more delicacy:

I think that as we watch that we will perhaps be able to prove that there is a class issue here also that was such a factor in the scrutiny of my candidacy versus, say, the scrutiny of what her candidacy may be.

I personally have been somewhat surprised that Caroline has been criticized at all by the press; I expected more of an anointment, which she certainly has not gotten. Nevertheless it’s true that she has been treated nowhere near as poorly as Palin was—but then again, few people on earth have been treated by the press as poorly as Palin was.

Palin adds that she was certainly aware of how badly things were going with the MSM almost from the start. Re the disastrous Couric interviews:

[M]y question to the campaign was, after it didn’t go well the first day, why were we going to go back for more?

This is another example of the fact that Palin had good political instincts. That was clear from the moment she gave her first speech, and it was one of the things that frightened the opposition and made them determined to destroy her. Her handlers should have trusted her more.

She’s not given up, but I wonder whether she’s through politically on the national level.

If the only thing we have to fear is…

The New Neo Posted on by

…fear itself, why does Obama keep playing on it?

In the financial crisis, he’s been sounding a relentlessly gloomy note from the very start. I agree that things are far from rosy, but I believe that Obama is doing no one any favors by being so consistently pessimistic. Perceptions and emotions affect the economic climate, and pronouncements of the President (or President-Elect) help to shape them.

The donut vs. the cupcake

The New Neo Posted on by

Donuts (or doughnuts, take your pick) are popular again, not that they ever really went out of style.

This article indicates that those luscious little bundles of fried dough are undergoing a renaissance, as well as a gentrification that includes something called the gourmet artisanal doughnut. Really. Examples of the latter include donuts with lavender-scented glaze, or flavors such as mashed banana-filled peanut butter.

Well, count me out. I actually only like one kind of doughnut: the sour cream glazed. And I only like them when they’re very fresh, and a bit heavy and rough-edged to give the right crust of crunchy, with many depressions and crevices in which the (non-lavender-scented) glaze can pool.

This exact type used to be readily available in the supermarket near where I live, representing a constant and not easily resisted temptation. Not only that, but a nearby bakery (which thankfully closed a few years ago) used to package up its unsold doughnuts late in the day and sell a bag of eight for about two dollars, and often that bag would contain nothing but the sour cream glazed variety. Dangerous.

A few years ago when the Krispy Kreme Kraze swept the country, I had to wait a while to get my first taste. But when I finally came across one, I was deeply disappointed. This was the donut I’d heard so much about? This airy thing that evaporated almost as soon as it entered the mouth? A travesty.

But worst of all is the cupcake. When I was a child I found them perfectly fine, but past the age of about eight I’ve never understood what the fuss is about. A cupcake is just a piece of cake with some icing, except there’s no layers and therefore no filling. So, what’s the big deal? Why have they become so incredibly popular these days?

And why oh why have they become so astoundingly expensive? At four dollars a pop, the things are ridiculous.

And stores entirely dedicated to them? I first encountered this phenomenon a couple of years ago in Greenwich Village. Nothing but cupcakes in the window, enticing aging and paunchy boomers to wax nostalgic and young and slender hipsters to contemplate the retro pleasures of the comfort food. It must hark back to something about childhood, but that’s as far as I can get with it.

The city is too much with us

The New Neo Posted on by

This article mentions that the world has passed an important milestone: more than half its population lives in cities. That means that city life is having a greater and greater effect on our culture, bodies, and psyches. So there’s reason to be interested in the crop of recent research discussed in the piece, which indicates that cities dull our ability to think, reduce our impulse control, and increase aggression.

This isn’t really all that surprising; some of these results have been known for some time What is somewhat new is that the same research suggests that just a bit of greenery can mitigate some of these effects. Although we are social animals, apparently we are also meant to be natural ones amidst the world of plants and foliage:

[J]ust looking at a natural scene can lead to higher scores on tests of attention and memory. While people have searched high and low for ways to improve cognitive performance, from doping themselves with Red Bull to redesigning the layout of offices, it appears that few of these treatments are as effective as simply taking a walk in a natural place.

Wordsworth had a thing or two to say about it all:

The world is too much with us; late and soon,
Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers:
Little we see in Nature that is ours;
We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!
The Sea that bares her bosom to the moon;
The winds that will be howling at all hours,
And are up-gathered now like sleeping flowers;
For this, for everything, we are out of tune;
It moves us not.””Great God! I’d rather be
A Pagan suckled in a creed outworn;
So might I, standing on this pleasant lea,
Have glimpses that would make me less forlorn;
Have sight of Proteus rising from the sea;
Or hear old Triton blow his wreathed horn.