Advice for sociologists and anthropologists
Two quotes, first: M Klein (1932) Psychoana
lysis of Children (p. 159): ‘What, as a child the individual shows us in these play phantasieswill emerge in him in manhood as a necessary condition of his love life;’
Second: from N. Elias (1965) The Established and the Outsiders concluding chapter:
‘There is a certain abhorrence (bld:FK)
..against the idea that societies or (-) the figuration which individuals form with eachother exercise some power over the individuals which form them and limits their freedom. Yet whatever our wishes may be, looking at available evidence, one cannot get away from the recognition that figurations limit the scope of individualsdecisions and in many ways have a compelling force even though this power doesnot reside, as it is often made to appear, outside individuals, but merelyresults from the interdependence (and gossip/ FK) between individuals. They fear that one may (notso/FK) magically (or ‘smartly’) deprive men of their freedom merely by sayingthings. Not facing up to the fact, that figurations of individuals ( ) have acompelling power over the individuals which form them, is one of the mainfactors which prevents human beings from lessening this compelling force. Forit is only if we understand its nature better that we can hope to gain somecontrol.’
For/of what might one want control? It is mostly ouroedipal dispositions/intuition/figuration/ ‘ambition,’/ consciences andcastration-fear, not to mention penis-envy, from toddler-times, that makes usadhere to or defy a figuration. Women have the‘intuition’ that keeps them ‘loyal’to each-other. They are more vulnerable and ‘scandal-’driven, revealing the‘markers’ and behavioral rules to look for. Playing along may not seem easywhen nodding and guestimating the ‘self-’rules and markers of any ‘figuration’ to be ‘respected.’