Derrida (1991) calls for ‘geopysychoanlysis’ as a response to the lack of political engagement and contextualization in the field of IPA psychoanalysis. This piece is a call to action from the author and speaks to the IPA’s discontinuity, homogeneity and disengagement (with “the rest of the world”) at the time. The quotes below are some of the most salient quotes which summarize the author’s arguments:
200 - “I am sure it will come as no surprise to you that my speaking of ‘geopsychoanalysis’—just as one speaks of geography or geopolitics—does not mean that I am going to propose a psychoanalysis of the earth of the sort that was put forward a few decades ago, when Bachelard evoked ‘The Earth and the Reveries of Rest’ and ‘The Earth and the Reveries of the Will.’ But as inclined as I may be today to distance myself from such a psychoanalysis of the earth, as likewise from the more recent and more urgent theme of an anti-psychoanalysis of territorialization, it is nevertheless upon the earth that I wish to advance—upon what the psychoanalysis of today considers to be the earth. “
202 - “My first hypothesis, formulated on the basis of personal experience, ran as follows: In this particular psychoanalytic world, here in Paris, there was a wish to listen as soon as possible, as early as possible, as early in the day as possible, without losing any time at all, to what this stranger—this "foreign body" belonging to n body, this non-member, in whatever capacity, of any of the psychoanalytical corporations of the world (or of the "rest of the world"), whether represented here today or not, whether European or Latin American—might possibly have to say.”
204 - “My reason for recalling this today is that there is practically no psychoanalysis in Africa, white or black, just as there is practically no psychoanalysis in Asia, or in the South Seas. These are among those parts of "the rest of the world" where psychoanalysis has never set foot, or in any case where it has never taken off its European shoes. I don't know whether you will find such considerations trivial or shocking.”
205 - “The political geography of the world has changed since that time, and intercontinental balances of power have been subject to much turbulence; this can hardly have failed, it seems to me, to have had an impact on the political geography of psychoanalysis. “
230 - “Under given conditions, once a protocol has been established, naming can become a historical and political act responsibility for whose performance is inescapable. This is a responsibility that the IPA has ducked at a particularly grave moment in history—the history of psychoanalysis included. Henceforward, should psychoanalysis wish to take the measure of what is happening in Latin America, to measure itself against what the state of affairs down there reveals, to respond to what threatens, limits, defines, disfigures or exposes it, then it will be necessary, at least, to do some naming.”
231 - “To call Latin America by its name, by what that name seems to mean for psychoanalysis today. At least as a start. All I could hope to contribute to that appeal today was: the naming of Latin America.”
Questions: Due to my lay knowledge of psychoanalysis and the political history of the field, what exactly prompted this piece? What was going on in Latin American and why did Derrida write this? What was the response of the IPA and the psychoanalytic community after this piece? Were changes really made? Have others taken up geopyschoanalysis?
