Skeptical Engagements [Paperback]

Fred Crews (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: June 1, 2002

This carefully reasoned and witty book presents a searing critique of the pretension and folly infecting the literary academy. Besides targeting the excesses of "theory," the essays cover such diverse figures as Joseph Conrad, Henry Miller, Norman Mailer, Philip Roth, Philip Rahv, and Leslie Fiedler.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Crews renounced Freudian theory some 11 years ago, and his lacerating attacks on psychoanalysis and its disciples, many of which are reprinted here, have earned this literary critic such epithets as "neo-Freudophobe," "murderous" and "irrational." To Crews, psychoanalysis is a pseudoscience, flawed as a theory, because it exists in an empirical vacuum, and weak as a therapy. One essay provocatively observes that Freud, while devising his grand system in the late 1890s, was beset by anxieties and taboos, having hallucinations, steeped in numerology and experimenting with cocaine. In this collection of essays and reviews, Crews also turns his critical fire on Marxism, a "born-again yet anemic religion" that has found a niche in academia. He tears into such fashionable movements as deconstructionism and structuralism, then brings to bear a skeptical intelligence on Norman Mailer, Henry Miller, Philip Roth, Leslie Fiedler, Philip Rahv and Joseph Conrad.
Copyright 1986 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal

Crews's crusade against psychoanalysis and other "self-validating" doctrines, such as structuralism and deconstruction, dominates the 14 pieces in this collection (only one of which is not a previously published essay-review). All but the most violently anti-Freudian readers are likely to find the first five polemics tediously excessive and repetitiousthough Crews raises issues, derived from the work of other scholars, that require cogent rebuttal. Four pieces on the new "indeterminism" in literary criticism are more restrained but still repetitious. The final reviews (of Roth, Miller/Mailer, Rahv, Fiedler, and Conrad) are probably the most temperate and engaging in the book. Crews is a knowledgeable, perceptive critic with a lively and shapely stylewhich makes his excesses all the more obtrusive. Richard Kuczkowski, Dir., Continuing Education, Dominican Coll., Blauvelt, N.Y.
Copyright 1986 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 256 pages
• Publisher: Cybereditions Corporation (June 1, 2002)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 187727500X
• ISBN-13: 978-1877275005
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6.2 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 12 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,666,738 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars A turning point in Crews' career, May 9, 2011

By 

David Walters (Auckland, New Zealand) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Skeptical Engagements (Paperback)

Skeptical Engagements is a key collection of essays by Frederick Crews, and it's surprising it hasn't received more reviews. Anyone interested in Crews should definitely read it, since it helps explain how he reached the views he expressed later in The Memory Wars, Unauthorized Freud, and Follies of the Wise. Unlike Crews' previous essay collection, Out of My System (published in 1975), where he expressed a mixed and rather equivocal verdict on the merits of psychoanalysis, Skeptical Engagements takes an almost entirely negative view of Freud's work.

The most important essay here is "Analysis Terminable", first published in Commentary in 1980. Although a previous essay by Crews, a 1975 piece on Erik Erikson, was also anti-psychoanalytic (as he points out), "Analysis Terminable" has received much more attention, and reading it, it's easy to see why. "Analysis Terminable" is combative in the extreme, and it's difficult to avoid concluding that it was written to provoke an equally extreme response from Freudians; for whatever reason, Crews must have been spoiling for a fight when he wrote it. Crews expresses his scorn not only for Freud, but for a series of eminent intellectuals and philosophers (Habermas, Ricoeur, Derrida, Lacan, Barthes...) who are "all Freudians in their various ways." Crews has big news for them: "psychoanalysis has received only trifling and debatable corroboration, and much devastating criticism." He is happy to imply that all these esteemed French figures (and the German Habermas) are a little dim-witted, writing, "If that criticism has yet to make an impact on literary intellectuals, we can anticipate that even they will eventually get the point." That is such a strange comment coming from someone who is himself a literary intellectual that one is left with the distinct impression that the hostility to psychoanalysis Crews acquired in the middle of the 1970s reflects an alienation from literary criticism itself.

Crews discusses the failings of psychoanalysis as a therapy, suggesting that "if it were shown that the Freudian clinical situation is epistemologically compromised by the therapist's presuppositions, then the whole necessity for positing the deep structures and mechanisms of the Freudian unconscious would dissolve", and citing a series of studies which concluded that psychoanalysis had no advantage over its competitors. He suggests that all therapies work (insofar as they do work) for the same reasons, including the placebo effect, a contention which is not implausible, but which he and the researchers he relies on could hardly claim to have proven. Crews sweepingly dismisses clinical evidence as so contaminated by suggestion that it is effectively worthless, a verdict which might or might not be fair.

Criticising psychoanalysis as a theory, Crews writes that Freud "took little care for self-consistency"; a more fair-minded writer might well praise Freud for being open-minded enough to consider more than one approach. He quotes an analyst as saying that Freud's writings were "formulated in a bewilderingly unsystematic way" - but one suspects that if they hadn't been, Crews would be quoting someone else complaining that Freud was overly systematic. Crews finds it a damning criticism of psychoanalysis that, "Notions like 'id' and 'Oedipus complex' and 'pleasure principle' take their meanings from a network of postulates that generate no straightforward behavioral consequences. Thus the presence or absence of such consequences in a given instance cannot serve as a test of theoretical adequacy." Such an objection might be valid in the case of the id and the pleasure principle; it is tendentious as a criticism of the Oedipus complex, a theory not remotely on the same level of abstraction.

The other essays here are also worth a look, although they also tend to suffer from the same mixture of reasonable criticisms of whatever Crews is writing against with unreasonable and exaggerated criticisms. The main failing of the book overall is that it does not provide a fully convincing or satisfactory account of Crews' reasons for rejecting psychoanalysis, something that he was committed to for many years. Crews could undoubtedly have written much more about this subject had he wished, and many of us might have been interested to read it.