Abstract
Arendt was famously dismissive of the work of psychologists, claiming that they did nothing more than reveal the pervasive ugliness and monotony of the psyche. If we want to know who people are, she argued, we should observe what they do and say rather than delving into the turmoil of their inner lives; if we want to understand humanity, we would be better off reading Oedipus Rex than hearing about someone's Oedipus complex. The rejection has a certain coherence in the context of her understanding of public life as the realm of appearance and opinion, but examining it through the specific question of ugliness complicates that understanding. While beauty invites us to contemplate the world and admire it, ugliness repels our attention and sows the seed of a worry that the world might not want to be known. Working with Eichmann in Jerusalem, The Life of the Mind: Thinking, the Kant lectures and a striking Denktagebuch entry in which she reacts with revulsion to Matisse's Heads of Jeannette, I argue that Arendt's response to the ugly psyche requires a re-examination of the sensus communis. If the psyche does not want to be known, and if not all points of view are open to imaginative occupation, the ideal and practice of enlarged mentality must reckon with a right to opacity.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 177-198 |
| Number of pages | 22 |
| Journal | Research in Phenomenology |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2020 |
Keywords
- Aesthetics
- Appearance
- Arendt
- Eichmann
- Judgment
- Kant
- Matisse
- opacity
- Psychoanalysis
- Psychology
- Ugliness
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The ugly psyche: Arendt and the right to opacity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver